From those who were there: investigation reveals that at least 156 witnessed WTC explosions


Firefighters 911

Todd Heaney and Frank DiLeo of Engine 209 help an injured firefighter. Photo: NY Daily News.

April 8, 2016

By Craig McKee

So much of the most important evidence the 9/11 Truth Movement has in its arsenal can be attributed to the work of researchers who went above and beyond what others were willing to do.

One who has made such a contribution is Canadian academic Graeme MacQueen. The retired university professor and author of The 2001 Anthrax Deception: The Case for a Domestic Conspiracy took on the daunting task of examining close to 12,000 pages of oral histories given by employees of the Fire Department of New York in the weeks and months after 9/11. These accounts reveal that many witnessed explosions in the World Trade Center that morning, supporting the position that the towers were brought down in controlled demolitions.

“It’s all well and good to say these buildings were demolished, but surely someone would notice, right?” MacQueen said in an interview. “Well, they did.”

This treasure trove of eyewitness evidence was just waiting to be examined, but for years the City of New York was determined to keep that from happening. It took a lawsuit by the New York Times to force the release of the pages in 2006.

The idea for the project, MacQueen explains, came from an article written early that year by David Ray Griffin, entitled “Explosive Testimony: Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories” in which 31 witnesses to explosions in the towers were identified. Fascinated by the selection of first-hand accounts that Griffin had presented, MacQueen thought a more detailed analysis of all 503 histories could reveal more. The accounts—from firefighters, emergency medical technicians, and paramedics—were recorded between early October 2001 and late January 2002.

“They suffered through the thing; many of them are sick now,” he explains. “They can tell me what they saw, what they heard, what they felt — just remarkable. What an opportunity to just get a sense of what it was like that day.”

As MacQueen discovered, many gave vivid descriptions of explosions. After carefully examining all the accounts, he arrived at a “cautious” total of 118 who reported blasts (he says he was actually criticized for underestimating).

“They’re more reliable, in my opinion, than most newspaper accounts because these people were taped, and the audio tapes were transcribed,” he says. “You get the name of the person; you get where they were, who interviewed them, and when they were interviewed. This is really useful.”

MacQueen: eyewitnesses important.

MacQueen: eyewitnesses important.

MacQueen posits that he was one of the first to read all of the firefighter oral histories, which were officially named The World Trade Center Task Force Interviews. (The accounts were taken by the Port Authority of New York at the instruction of city fire commissioner Thomas Von Essen.) The result of MacQueen’s investigation was an article called “118 Witnesses: The Firefighters’ Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers,” which was published in the Journal of 9/11 Studies (of which he is currently co-editor) in August 2006. More on the findings can be found in the AE911Truth book Beyond Misinformation , which was released last September.  (I was a contributing writer to the book while MacQueen served on its technical review committee.)

While the figure of 118 became established within the Truth Movement—even though people were often not aware of where it had originated—MacQueen decided in 2011 that he could investigate whether there were witnesses to explosions other than FDNY employees. He examined police accounts assembled by the Port Authority Police Department and looked at many media reports that featured interviews with eyewitnesses and first-hand reports by journalists.

The result of this phase of work was a second paper, entitled “Eyewitness Evidence of Explosions in the Twin Towers,” which he presented at the International Hearings on the Events of September 11, 2001, better known as the Toronto Hearings, that September. His findings led him to increase the cautious total of witnesses to 156.

“I wasn’t just worried about my own credibility, I was really worried about the credibility of the movement,” he said, adding that there could be many more who witnessed explosions, and he encourages others to continue this research.

In MacQueen’s second paper, he quotes firefighters Dennis Tardio and Pat Zoda, who many have seen in various 9/11 videos (including the Naudet brothers documentary) describing the series of explosions they witnessed. MacQueen writes:

Zoda says, as he moves his hand: “Floor by floor, it started poppin’ out.” Tardio concurs and uses the same hand gesture: “It was as if they had detonated, detonated (Zoda: “Yeah, detonated, yeah”), you know, as if they were planted to take down a building: boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom.” Zoda adds: “All the way down. I was watching and running.”

The paper quotes Paul Lemos, a set designer who was in the WTC vicinity to participate in filming a TV commercial:

All of a sudden I looked up and about twenty stories below…the fire…I saw, from the corner, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom…just like twenty straight hits, just went down and then I just saw the whole building just went ‘pshew’…and as the bombs were goin’ people just started running and I sat there and watched a few of ‘em explode and then I just turned around and I just started running for my life because at that point the World Trade Center was coming right down…

 

Why eyewitnesses are so important

When he first began to look at the oral histories, MacQueen explains, he thought it would be helpful for the movement if he could contribute some “solid and quantifiable” data that could help test the controlled demolition hypothesis, adding that the eyewitness record is a valuable complement to all the forensic evidence that has been gathered. He admits there are significant prejudices against eyewitness accounts because many feel they are unreliable. But, he says, it is possible to learn a great deal from what eyewitnesses describe when the accounts are analyzed and when they are combined with other types of evidence.

“Eyewitness evidence is really important,” he asserts. “Ordinary people can identify; they can relate to that. If you start evoking their high school physics, they just tune out. But if you can say, look, this was a cop who was on the scene and says there was an explosion that was so strong it picked him up and threw him across the concourse—well, they can relate to that.”

First responder ground zero

Firefighters offer vivid descriptions of explosions.

In his second article, MacQueen addressed the claim by some that eyewitnesses are unreliable and therefore should be disregarded:

Eyewitness evidence certainly has its vulnerabilities: we know that eyewitnesses can misperceive, misremember and deceive. But, as with other kinds of evidence, we have developed ways of checking to see if what the witnesses report is accurate. For example, we look for corroborating evidence—further eyewitness evidence as well as evidence of entirely different kinds.

He makes the point that it is important not only to look at how many people perceived explosions but also how many of the histories seemed to contradict them.

“You don’t just cherry pick; you don’t just look for things that support your hypothesis, you look for the opposite as well.”

MacQueen explains in the second paper that of the 156 eyewitnesses, 121 are from the Fire Department of New York, 14 are from the Port Authority Police Department, 13 are reporters (most of whom were working for major television networks), and eight are listed as “other”—mostly civilians who worked in the area of the Towers.

“Members of the FDNY and PAPD are what we call “first responders.” So 135 out of 156 witnesses, or 87% of the total, are first responders. This is significant because these people have had much more experience of explosions than most of us. Moreover, their statements were given to superior officers as part of their professional duties, and the circumstances in which the statements were collected make this eyewitness evidence, in my view, very strong.”

One of the challenges for MacQueen when he began his project in 2006 was how to analyze the documents—what to look for, what would support the existence of explosions, and what would count against it. He read through the accounts once to determine a list of terms that would be relevant to the subject and then a second time to record how many featured key words like “explosion,” “bomb,” “implosion,” and “blast.” As he proceeded, he says he made a point of erring on the side of caution—meaning that someone who mentioned a loud rumbling or other similarly vague description was not included in the total.

Firefighters 2A number of those interviewed for the oral histories later changed their view about explosions, MacQueen concedes, but this came after the official narrative was firmly established, and that narrative did not include the use of explosives. Some firefighters who originally said they experienced explosions later came to think they must have been mistaken because the official story had the buildings coming down primarily because of office fires.

“Our memory of these things will change, and it will tend to be in the direction of the social consensus,” MacQueen points out.

But despite some changing their story as time passed, most of those who reported explosions have stuck to their stories, and their powerful and revealing oral histories are a tremendously valuable resource for anyone who wants to know what happened at Ground Zero that day.

“It’s extremely important,” he says. “The whole global war on terror is at stake here.”

***

A few examples of what fire department employees described

Richard Banaciski

South Tower: We were there I don’t know, maybe 10, 15 minutes and then I just remember there was just an explosion. It seemed like on television they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.

Gregg Brady

North Tower: We were standing underneath and Captain Stone was speaking again. We heard — I heard 3 loud explosions. I look up and the north tower is coming down now…

Edward Cachia

South Tower: As my officer and I were looking at the south tower, it just gave. It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit, because we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.

Frank Campagna

North Tower: That’s when it went. I looked back. You see three explosions and then the whole thing coming down. I turned my head and everybody was scattering.

Craig Carlsen

South Tower: I guess about three minutes later you just heard explosions coming from building two, the south tower. It seemed like it took forever, but there were about ten explosions. At the time I didn’t realize what it was. We realized later after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit. We then realized the building started to come down. The second one coming down, you knew the explosions. Now you’re very familiar with it.

John Coyle

South Tower: I started running after him and looking over my shoulder. The tower was–it looked to me–I thought it was exploding, actually. That’s what I thought for hours afterwards, that it had exploded or the plane or there had been some device on the plane that had exploded, because the debris from the tower had shot out far over our head… But nobody knew what had happened. I still thought it had exploded, something had exploded. At that point I had no idea what had happened. It seemed that the thing had blown up.

North Tower: Everybody I think at that point still thought these things were blown up. So I was fully expecting anything else to blow up.

Frank Cruthers

And while I was still in that immediate area, the south tower, 2 World Trade Center, there was what appeared to be at first an explosion. It appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay before you could see the beginning of the collapse.

Kevin Darnowski

South Tower: At that time I started walking back up towards Vesey Street. I heard three explosions, and then we heard like groaning and grinding, and tower two started to come down.

 

56 comments

      1. You know, there is the Sanders revolution (countdown to someone telling me he’s another puppet and there’s no difference between him and Trump – 3… 2… 1…) going on. And while I don’t expect him to do a full endorsement of AE911Truth, he has mentioned the Rumsfeld press conference on 9/10 and the missing 2.3 trillion…

        1. Dear Adam,

          Regarding the Bernie Sanders revolution, what do you think of the following three things?

          1. 90 seconds here, from 17:32 to 19:04 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RryusiAHm8s

          2. 60 seconds here, from 33:01 to 34:01 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43ELbMo4D1o

          3. I picked this one up from Cynthia McKinney. The point of this article is that Sanders has made a long list of ways he intends to raise the money for his proposed welfare model, but none of those ways involve cuts in the gargantuan defense budget. (Attack budget, obv.) http://worldbeyondwar.org/7106-2/

          I would love to hear your thoughts on these things! (And the thoughts of any Bernie supporter, for that matter.)

          Best wishes

          1. Regarding his stance on 9/11: It’s disappointing, but to be expected. I guess we the people have to “pull him further to the left.” Ha ha.

            1. Dear Adam

              Thanks for your reply!

              Haha.. It’s good that you still have your humour.. I think that’s important. I vaguely remember seeing some video of a talk by David Ray Griffin and Richard Gage once, and during the Q&A one lady asked DRG something like: “What should be our strategy for turning Obama and Clinton around?” DRG replied along the lines of “It’s good to have hope…… (pause).. But I think we probably ought to place it somewhere else.” The whole crowd burst out laughing. It was a great moment. (BTW, I haven’t been able to find that video again, and I only vaguely remember it, so please don’t take my quote as very accurate.)

              I guess the moment any politician even gets close to talking about MIHOP, they’re politically done. Sad situation.

              I think this left/right thing is kind of a divide and conquer strategy that the elite has used for centuries now to distract the public. I don’t really care much for left nor right.

              Truth should be the prime criteria for judging a good politician, but unfortunately, truth is also one of the sparsest things among politicians.

              I have zero patience left for these truth avoiding politicians (even the seemingly revolutionary ones). I don’t care about how many nice things they say. I’ve been fooled too many times now. (Remember that genius George W. Bush quote about being “fooled again?”)

              I would, however, support politicians who have somewhat passed the litmus test by touching MIHOP, like Cynthia McKinney or Mike Gravel, but we all know that the way it’s currently set up, those guys (or anyone who has even touched MIHOP) can get nowhere near a successful run for any type of meaningful office.

              So, as I’m sure most people here will agree, the only way for anything to really change is for the people themselves to really change. If people really care about truth, they will be able to see through fraudulent politicians more and more, and they won’t tolerate them. So, I guess you can finish your countdown. I’m suggesting that Bernie is just another puppet. He wants to have a Scandinavian model? Well, I’m Scandinavian and we also have controlled media, false flag attacks (yes), corrupt governments and no real democracy. As and extra bonus we get to pay for brainwashing through education through our own tax money, just like we pay for countless other corrupt endeavors that way.

              So politically, I guess it looks kinda bleak. But I think as long as we are truthful with ourselves and our friends, and try to live good, happy lives, we can try to raise ourselves above all these corrupt politicians. We don’t have to let them define our lives.

              I wonder if 9/11 Truth will ever really break through? It is certainly the most darning event of the century… It’s so unbelievable. Oh well. Only time will tell.

              1. I think they are all prostitutes. Anybody that tries to play fair gets Kennedied.

                Paul Wellstone got Kennedied, Vince Fosta and Admiral Boorda got Kennedied. And the Kennedy’s got Kennedied.

                There is no room for integrity in Washington.

                1. Dear Travis

                  Yeah, sad really, but I guess the world is like that. Sometimes I think the perps of these things actually *want* a certain amount of the intelligentsia to understand what actually happened. That would scare people and help to keep them in line. Sort of like a mafia tactic. (Mafia bosses often *want* to have a reputation for killing those who oppose them, as that helps keep the rest of their people in line.) If we think of 9/11 as a coup, we could apply the same line of thought to 9/11 itself. Sort of like a massive announcement of power and ruthlessness, but one that’s hidden from the less knowledgeable part of the general public. Here is an interesting article regarding that: http://web.archive.org/web/20091027001050/http://geocities.com/mdmorrissey/logical6 (If the browser renders this as two URL’s, copy the whole thing, because it’s really just one URL.) I’ve already suggested that Craig write about this and I’m still hoping he will🙂.

                    1. The article I linked to, you mean? Or what I wrote?

                      Very understandable, and a very natural reaction, but still, would you care to elaborate?

        2. Dear Adam

          Sorry about calling you David in my previous reply. Just a slip.

          Craig, could you please correct that in my previous post? It was supposed to be adressed to Adam, not David.

  1. Truly there is no need for eyewitnesses. Everyone saw it. If you didn’t see it, you can choose multiple camera angles. Perhaps some of us need to brush up on Newtonion laws of motion and the Conservation of Energy/Momentum. The Force is invisible, but the acceleration is clearly measurable. When emotion wears off & logic is applied, it is clear the energy far exceeds the gravitational potential energy of the building.

  2. All of the photos you have posted are FAKE, photoshopped. This is a complete lie set into motion by the U.S. Luciferian cabal. Anyone who knows photoshop can see where the men have been inserted. As for all of the dust and damage, it was prerecorded to use for the day of demoltions. There were no planes. It was a mega ritual, Ode to Aleister Crowley.

    Who doesn’t know that Ann Cappelletti & Barbara Bush are illegitimate witch daughters of Aleister Crowley conceived with sex magick with their mothers. Ann was conceived in 1923 at Abbey of Thelema, Barbara was concieved w sex magick in Paris in 1924. Bush & Cappelletti brothers are all involvd in the mega ritual of 911, and subsequent false flags events.

    Bush and Cappelletti brothers are all involved as practitioners of black magick. Ann has practiced sorcery for a long time, having been raised in South Philadelphia, where a Strega witch community thrived.

    Was Barbara Bush’s real father Aleister Crowley?
    http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/04/337857.shtml

    I know the evil Cappellettis. John was my college boyfriend at Penn State in the early 1970s. Joey Cappelletti was sacrificed by Ann for John’s success. There is much more.Ann has made a good living selling sorcery to people and ran a coven in the Upper Darby, PA area. Wonder why trains crashed in Philadelphia? Because it was a setup hoax by the coven. Wonder why Penn State and Joe Paterno suffered. Think Witch Ann Cappelletti.

  3. Is there any reporters that can get names from the establishment that stashed some money away into offshore accounts right before or after 911 that can be revealed to show it was an inside job and how some has benefited from this tragedy

  4. the biggest problem in uncovering facts is media complicity; example, on anniversaries of JFK assassination the same facts are thrown out at the public over and over: 3 bullets, magic, Zap ruder film, grassy knoll etc…all stuff that lends itself to inconclusive conversation, reporting
    ad nausea

    The simple reporting information is ignored, unknown to 90+ % of the public; factual tracing of
    50 to 100 key figures tells the story…Ruby (Mafia stooge)knew Oswald (CIA stooge), Ruby
    (Rubenstein) can be traced back over the years donating to political campaigns (Nixon) part of gun running operation to Cuba, etc. GHW Bush ( CIA secret operative) in Dallas 11/23, LBJ’s mistress testimony, Cuban exiles connections to FBI..CIA,…Allen Dulles serial murderer for two decades and enemy of the President placed in charge of investigation.
    The dozens of people connected to the crime meeting untimely death.

    There are literally 100’s of traceable connections leaving no doubt that there indeed was a conspiracy to kill the President.

    Suggested reading : JFK and The Unspeakable

    This brutal overthrowing of our Government brings into question who we are as Americans,
    has it all been a lie, is there more shame( killing a popular leader in broad daylight) ( slaughter of millions Vietnam) than glory? Perhaps too heavy for folks to allow into consciousness…

    1. There are two videos you must watch. The 1st one is
      JFK, The Mafia and Illuminati with Jack O’Halloran Short version 1 hour

      JFK, The Mafia and Illuminati with Jack O’Halloran, long version, 2-1/2 hours

      Jack O’Halloran was at the party at Clint Murchison’s house on 11/21/63, the night before the JFK assassination. This is a must see. Jack names who was there and how JFK was shot from the curb sewer where the shooter stood in the cauldron.

      2nd video is
      JFK to 911 Everything Is A Rich Man’s Trick

    2. I am so sorry. I posted the wrong video link to
      JFK, The Mafia and Illuminati with Jack O’Halloran, long version, 2-1/2 hours

  5. A line of inquiry that could use more investigation is the tracking of the recovery of human remains by the FDNY Phoenix Unit. (Google image search for ‘ny post 9/11 mosque’). This shows there were over 20,000 body parts recovered (so on average each victim was torn into about 7 pieces). But many remains were small, so many victims were not complete cadavers. Also, some remains are fragments of firefighters, so these could not have been created by the aircraft impacts.

    Getting raw GIS data with the location, victim identity/profession, and type of remain would be extremely valuable. While gruesome, if there is a remain of a firefighter that is a bone fragment hundreds of feet from the towers, that’s pretty definitive proof for explosives. Plus, this connects to the first responder victims, which will have a stronger emotional pull than the destruction of inanimate buildings.

  6. It’d be good for you to provide your information for this article using video uploaded to YouTube You’d thereby have a far better chance of reaching, say, many more people. I got the link via AE911Truth.org.

    http://www.ae911truth.org/news/247-news-media-events-wtc-explosions-described-by-the-people-who-were-there.html

    By providing at YouTube, even if it’s only audio that you choose to do, you have a greater chance of this information you’re presenting becoming more widespread. Otheerwise, I don’t think many people will become aware of this article.

    1. I have been posting my information for years. There are many people who know the truth, who are part of the 911 scam. Until a person with authority speaks out, it doesn’t matter what I say. Neither I nor anyone who absolutely knows the truth about 911 will ever be taken seriously. The Bushes and those liars in office, i.e., Barry Soetoro & Clintons are also involved in the cover-up. Until a person in power speaks out, the truth will remain hidden.

      1. linda254 said:

        “The Bushes and those liars in office, i.e., Barry Soetoro & Clintons are also involved in the cover-up”

        Are you serious?

        How could Bush, Clinton and Obama cover up anything?…..they’re nothing but puppets.

        It is the Puppet Masters who run “our” government and own the mass media that are covering up everything.

        “Until a person in power speaks out, the truth will remain hidden”

        NOTHING(!!!) is going to happen until there is a Revolution, whether peaceful or violent.

        The problem isn’t just the “president” or the media, or academia, or the “government”…..it’s the whole System from top to bottom.

        1. Who are these “puppet masters”? Do you have a few names perhaps? When and how did they become puppet masters?

      2. Do citizens have criteria?
        If in the movie “Top Gun” radar range military aircraft is 300 miles
        In the 11S commercial aircraft were undetectable?
        Military organizations can be very, very deceitful.
        but nothing, nothing stupid.
        Not knowing anything on the 10th, to know all day 12 is impossible.
        The most powerful state in the world planting a lie.

      3. linda254, it’s plain common sense to understand or realise, quote: “There are many people who know the truth, who are part of the 911 scam”. Of course and it’s obvious that people part of the 9/11 “scam”, being responsible for this false flag series of attacks, know it’s a FF event (and who truly is responsible, or most of all anyway), but surely not every one of them know every detail. However, some must surely know them all. The people top- or top-most responsible would know it all; and, we’d be unrealistic to believe for even 5 seconds that such criminals and traitors would publicly provide the full truth. The only part of the full truth that I’m aware of them having so far said is that the USA was attacked on 9/11, without saying by whom and exactly how, as well as why, the reason(s).

        Each party employed (treasonously) to do various parts of the tasks involved would surely know only what they’re tasked to do and not other related details or information.

        Quote: “Neither I nor anyone who absolutely knows the truth about 911 will ever be taken seriously”.

        That’s false and surely not only imo. After all, plenty of people take the real and best 9/11 “truthers” most seriously and believe very strongly in the work these people have begun to do or undertake at different times, like in different years, starting in 2001 and subsequent years. If people didn’t do this, if no one did, then no one would be strongly or wholly appreciative of the work of AE911Truth, Kevin Ryan, who has the blog DigWithin.net but who began his 9/11 research and writings plus interviews even earlier, 911research.wtc.net and sister site 911review.com, 911blogger.com, and some others. All of these resources are the ones I’ve been using starting well over 12 years ago; not all as equally early, for, and f.e., AE911Truth was founded in 2005 while some of these others began earlier. There were also a few others producing very good 9/11 truth research articles starting before the end of 2001, though I didn’t have Internet access at that time, not until May 2002, for there was a short period of what essentially was heing homeless for me.

        Otoh, I did hear the bs from the White House in news media reports beginning quite immediately, weeks before October 7th, 2001, when Washington and NATO began their carpet bombing of Afghanistan and I told some friends in Quebec, Canada, that Washington was lying and full of, well, call it manure, for political correctness phrasing in this blog, here. My friends agreed. I’m originally from the USA, though parents were originally from Quebec, and I had relocated/moved to Qc. I voluntarily enlisted in the USN at age 18 and got out at the end of bootcamp because unconstitutional, so treasonous, senior officers had given me two options to choose from and one was to leave the USN. They unconstitutionally didn’t accept that I admitted to having previously consumed marijuana and a little “acid” and I didn’t want to serve as a liar so told the truth. The second option was to go to some stupid rehab. facility for two weeks; a complete and sick joke. I had already and successfully done 62 days of bootcamp and 62 is a “little” more than 14 days. I refused to serve under such “leadership”. Our company P.O,, Petty Officer (no rank of Sgt exists in the Navy) and his assistant P.O. were people I’d accept to serve with, but not the jerks of senior officer ranks who dictated to me in some sort of military courtroom. They’re traitors and have no respect for the Constitution, BoR, as well as international laws, conventions and treaties the US is co-signer of and which, therefore, the US Constitution explicitly makes part of “Law of the Land” for the USA. Traitors!

        So, I think some people are “pretty” and very serious, as opposed to being gullible fools about extremely important matters.

        In a way, I take even the truly or most truly guilty people for 9/11 seriously, realising that they’re guilty of the highest level of treason a person could commit. I believe it’s the highest level, but if someone disagrees and provides examples of how traitors could be of worse level, then I’ll be ready to give what they say some consideration. For now, however, I don’t know of a higher or worse level of hlatant/flagrant treason and also believe that many other moral “truth seekers” or demanders surely share in or have this view.

        I don’t, however, hold GW Bush responsible, for he was just a puppet President controlled by other people who have even worse criminal minds as well as “intelligence” for planning, manipulating, etc. Cheney and Rumsfeld are two who plenty, maybe not plenty enough, but still a good number of 9/11 truth seekers well-rounded in what they’ve learned about 9/11 with the use of sound common sense, wit, etc., have said the same thing and there’s good, unacceptable, but still real reason for this perspective. Bush was an idiot appointed to be President figurehead and it was clear on a number of occasions that he was being manipulated or, iow, controlled.

        This isn’t to preach to you. Rather, it’s just to share a difference of viewpoint or perspective. Furthermore, I believe that key truths have been expertly determined by AE911Truth and people who variously or variably contribute. Kevin Ryan’s investigations have been very different while nonetheless and specifically about 9/11, for AE911Truth has only focused on explaining how the WTC buildings, 1, 2 and 7, were destroyed, while Kevin has been dedicatedly researching who the people most likely to be responsible for the 9/11 attacks tasks most likely are. 911research.wtc7.net, 911review.com and 911blogger.com include the research of AE911Truth and Kevin Ryan but also provides more truth research information about other very important aspects of the whole false flag event, so of course including the strike on the Pentagon with, yes, a commercial airliner that was either AA 77 or a highly similar other one, UA 93’s shootdown over a rural field in Pennsylvania, and more.

        Dr Steven Jones and some other scientists who received samples of the dust formed by the incredible pulverization of concrete and other materials making up parts of the destroyed WTC structures and some contents thereof, like computers, f.e., have had a more narrow but highly important focus.

        All of these people clearly are most serious and it’s been obvious to me since before the carpet bombing of Afghanistan by Washington and NATO that these latter two have always been full of bs, lies, about all of this and related subsequent wars, open and covert kinds controlled, first of all, by DC.

        If this doesn’t help to convince you that some people who most seriously are very greatful for the excellent work true researchers/analysts about 9/11 have provided, then I guess that we must then guess that nothing will be able to convince you. But, I think and hope that it’s unlikely that you’d continue to say that no one takes these true research and activist works un-seriously.

        I’ve contributed as an ordinary citizen, not being expert enough to be able to do as these other great activists have been providing for years, but still being able to refer other people to these top resources, while also communicating what for me anyway is really common sense, things we can observe or realise without needing to be experts in any relevant fields of study.

        However, there still remain people (I don’t know how many they are today, statistically) who still “buy into” Washington’s bs about 9/11. Yes, this continues, but the numbers of them is, statistically and hopefully, dropping. Not a majority but still an important/significant minority of Americans didn’t believe Washington’s “official story” or “conspiracy theory” and this was several years ago. Of that (important) minority, some believed that Washington possibly only and deliberately/knowingly/irresponsibly allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen, while the rest leaned towards “inside job”, the view I’ve had for well over a decade+. I think the statistical finding was that the total of these Americans was around 38%, but this was nearly a decade ago and I don’t know what the percentage would be today. However, it surely (I hope) couldn’t have lessened. It’d surely be higher or at least not lower.

        We all know that the US population is 300,000+, so 38% is NOT insignificant. In US presidential elections, there regularly has been 40% or so of eligible voters who voted for neither of the two main parties, Dem. and Repub., while the pre-selected individual who has been so-called elected got 1% or 2% more than the main so-called opponent and neither “normally” gets more than 30, 31, 32%. Well, imo, the 40% is a stronger message, saying, f.e., “We want neither of you” (so-called main parties). It’s been my traditional way, for I won’t vote for such political parties; neither in the USA nor in Canada, although the latter, where I also have the right to vote in federal and provincial elections, has more than two “main” parties; two top ones, but also two others always making up Parliament, the NDP and BQ. (The Libs and Cons are the two topmost ones, but the NDP and Quebec-leaning BQ are always present in Parliament.) I will not vote for any of them. They’re all wrong, “in so many ways”, esp. since NDP has changed to become unacceptable for “leader” since the prior one who apparently (learned only through word-of-mouth) was okay but died last year or the year prior, recently enough anyway.

        Iow, what’s needed a true and therefore well-vetted People’s govt. A corrupted govt will never do humanity good. It’s always going to be bs criminality, making the “outlaw gangs” dwarfed in power of criminality and injustice.

        These govts may occasionally do some good, beneficial things for society, but their extreme criminality and treachory is mindboggling. And they make secretive use of “outlaw gangs”, i.e., “organized crime” groups, while pretending to be honest, honourably in service for governance, etc.

        Again, this isn’t to preach. Instead, it’s only to freely and respectfully exchange views or perspectives. We free and respectful exchange, we may help each other, and it’s an important thing for humankind to do. I don’t want to be perceived as sermoning though; only exchanging thoughts and a little about some personal experiences..

        With all due respects, yes, I take the good truth activists very seriously. I don’t necessarily need them or their work for basics, but their work is important and useful, to both me and anyone who appreciates the work when I refer people to these works, plus all others who, without my references, learn of these fuller sources of information on their or or through other referers.

        I had not learned of this blog until recently and thanks to AE911Truth. Hey, I’m at bottom, economically, and really need to spend many hours looking for consigned cans and bottles to try to “better” my economic situation due to joblessness. A person needs to eat, buy (used) shoes and clothing, etc, when in the economic bottoms; but that stuff costs $$, too, unless lucky enough to find it while checking bins of trash and recyclable materials. Still, I’ve spent many hours for many years working to keep informed about corrupt (occasionally good, approvable anyway, but mostly corrupt) governance of … plenty of countries.

      4. linda254, furthermore, and about, quote: “Neither I nor anyone who absolutely knows the truth about 911 will ever be taken seriously”, no one knows ALL of the truth except for the topmost responsible people for 9/11. None of our best 9/11 truth researches absolutely knows the full truth, though do know and report enough, from their research, to be definitely convincing about 9/11 having been an “inside job” false flag event orchestrated from within. There’s no doubt about that, but even Kevin Ryan, one of the very top researchers, investigators has said that he’s found only the most likely suspects. Being suspect is important, but it isn’t absolute knowledge. It isn’t definitive.

        The topmost leaders of this “inside job”, false flag event know the full truth, or certainly more than others; at the very least being the most guilty, though the others, “contributing” for carrying out the various and directly related tasks, are also guilty for their roles. Whether or not the latter parties all knew that 9/11 was or had to have been an “inside job”, hence a most treachorous act, or not, I don’t know, but by far most adults should have learned that you don’t remove crime-scene evidence until it’s been well investigated and official approval is then legally permissible. Well, people, businesses that removed by far most of the evidence aren’t operated by infants. Still, those people would surely not have absolute knowledge about 9/11.

        Compartmentalization exists. It’s been truly happening for ages. The practice of providing information on an only a “NEED to know” basis is ages old. The same is true for saying no more than you need to convey to each party involved. Etc.

        It can also be true for honest, good-willed, constitutional, … people. As you can see or learn from my prior reply, I was honest with the USN, wanting to serve constitutionally and not under a pack of traitors, hypocrites, etc, so admitted to having consumed innocent, benign (and beneficial) marijuana, plus a little “acid”, which was not as preferable as good mari-jane. These ass*holes are treachorous. They don’t want to follow “the spirit” of law. They want to make up their own laws, and that’s unacceptable.

        My guess is that many of those people know this truth, reality, and they’re “just” corrupt. Surely, many of them must realise this. They’re taught the fundamentals of the Law, so I find it difficult to believe that they ALL naively act against the Law.

        But as for absolute truth, iow, omniscient knowledge of all of the important truth, I don’t expect humans to be able to arrive at this for most events. I’m not God and am therefore not Omniscient. Check out the following video from CorbettReport in March 2016. You’ll surely find it interesting.

        “Meet the Bogus Technology the Government Will Use to Frame You”,

        It’ll “send chills up your spine”, if you haven’t already learned about such bs use of tech. I listened to the video back in March but listening again to it a month later, it’s only more chilling, for I had basically forgotten about it. With life as screwed up as it is, I can quickly forget some details reported about it.

        I don’t always agree or fully agree with every person I mostly agree with and the same is true with James Corbett’s work, but he does some reporting that I agree with being realistic and think that every human can make mistakes that’re unintentional. So we must always keep a critical and independent mind. We can all make mistakes and an old expression is that someone who never errs is someone who never attempts to do anything important; something like that anyway.

        1. Incorrect link for the video, “Meet the Bogus Technology the Government Will Use to Frame You”. The correct link is the following one published in March 2016, whereas the “Meet the Clintons” video was also published by corbettreport, only it was in Oct. 2012.

          https://www.youtube.com/wattch?v=Cbdw8ViEl1Y

          I evidently had too many tabs open and used the url for the wrong video.

    1. Very interesting video. It makes sense that what we think we saw is not necessarily so. Right in plain sight we don’t have the ability to see things that experts can see. We all excel in certain areas but it is impossible to excel in everything.

      Since the subject of this thread is about explosions, and a lot of folks heard them, can we say it was from a specific thing? Did anyone consider truck tires exploding? Did any of these firemen see the explosions or did they just hear them? One fireman said the Scott Packs on a firetruck was exploding and he saw it. Was there natural gas leaking in the building and if so did this explode? Not everything that explodes is a bomb or set charges put there by an expert.

      Propane and gasoline fumes are heavier then air and will go to the lowest point available such as the basement where explosions were heard.

      The logistics of it being controlled demolition doesn’t make sense since none of the buildings were stripped to leave the steel beams bare so an expert could set the charges. Like Loizeaux the expert said, not everything that explodes is a bomb..

      1. Roger, what are you talking about? The “logistics of it being controlled demolition doesn’t make sense”? This is such a ridiculous statement that it barely deserves an acknowledgement. As for your idea that all the explosions people heard could have come from other causes, do you have any basis for this? Have you read the article and the firefighters’ accounts that Dr. MacQueen’s study is based on? I suggest you do.

        1. Craig, have you never read or heard some news article on any old larger fire incident where people reported hearing explosions?
          If you ever have: How often? Were these explosions bombs?
          If you never have; Where are you hiding? Why are you not looking at other fire incidents to figure out whether or not reports of “explosions” are rare or commom, expected or mysterious, suspicious or trivial?

          1. Jens, I’m really tired of you.

            Why don’t you start you own blog, and you can write about how all the explosions witnessed by firefighters fit PERFECTLY with the official story. In fact, you can show us how EVERYTHING can be made to fit the official story. You can ask dozens of questions of your readers, who will scurry off to carry out whichever assignments you’ve given them. And you can be as smug and condescending as you wish.

        2. Craig McKee you asked….. “Roger, what are you talking about? The “logistics of it being controlled demolition doesn’t make sense”? ”

          Make a simple reply, when did the buildings have the charges put in them so it could be brought down?

          You said… “This is such a ridiculous statement that it barely deserves an acknowledgement.”

          Only if you refuse to see or think outside the box you placed yourself in. We all saw the hundreds of huge buildings that were brought down by controlled demolition all over the world and none of them look like the Towers and the other five buildings that got destroyed. You assume this was the only way buildings could be destroyed.

          LOIZEAUX said it takes months to do a big job and the buildings are gutted. These WTC buildings had people working in them right up to the big explosions with the big fireball. When do you figure these buildings were set up with the charges?

          You asked…. “As for your idea that all the explosions people heard could have come from other causes, do you have any basis for this?”

          Lots of them. One that sticks out was the fireman who was watching the Scott Pacs inside the truck exploding one by one. If you were around the corner and heard this, what would you think? Boom Boom.

          Tell me something, how many times have you heard a bomb go off? Like LOIZEAUX said everything that goes BOOM does not mean it is explosives. I heard tires explode and it makes a hell of a lot of racket and anything near get’s moved around. That’s why they put them in cages when pumping them up. Same thing with propane tanks. You assume a loud bang is a dynamite stick or some demolition charge encased in a copper jacket.

          What blew up the Lobby before the building came down? People were still running around in there but not one single person can say it was charges on steel beams.

          Would you quote or paste something in the MacQueen study of people looking at a device that exploded?

          1. Roger, I assume nothing. You are asking me how many times I’ve heard a bomb go off. But the article and MacQueen’s study isn’t based on me, it’s based on accounts from firefighters who do know the difference between explosions that typically occur in fires and those that result from the deliberate planting of explosives.

            “Would you quote or paste something in the MacQueen study of people looking at a device that exploded?”

            How about you do your own research?

        1. eslkevin What are you referring to, “there are too many coincidences”? You seem to be reluctant in speaking your mind.

          1. I am erring on the fact that too many coincidences means that many are not coincidences. My engineering background lacks, a bit so I have to hedge.

  7. most people i speak to believe 9/11 did not happen at all the way the government tells us it happened. but yet nothing has come of it? what percentage of the population needs to be aware of this truth before people are held accountable? can these people be held accountable, or are we to apathetic and engaged in our own lives to care? hard to say. when the revolution occurs i will be there
    https://fadednjaded.wordpress.com/

    1. There are Orwellian propaganda agents trolling the internet trying to tell us that black is white. [see Roger Gloux] This has much to do with it.

      1. Cute Travis. If you can’t think, you can always make silly statements to shift the subject. I believe there were explosions but not the kind your convinced was made from thermite. Like several firemen said, the Scott Packs were exploding in the safety vehicles, yet they were not on fire. You assume these were charges set in the buildings, which makes no sense at all considering you don’t do this before the demolition has started.

        The only thing is it wasn’t controlled demolition. but instead a destruction starting at the top and worked it’s way down one floor at a time in 1/10th of a second per floor. Never has this been done this way before.

    2. I don’t think those responsible are going to get anything as retribution for what they did. They own the courts and it will be thrown out. In 2006 there were 43% of the population in the USA who didn’t believe the leaders in the Government were responsible.

      What do you do? They use the armed forces as their puppets to do anything they want, like destroy every country in the Middle East for the purpose of controlling the oil and eventually the whole Earth.

      Who do you think is going to take up residence in the Fema prisons built all over the USA? People who wont bow to the NWO. Only 62 very rich people have more money and power then 3 1/2 billion people. How are you going to stop them?

      Anyone speaking against the NWO is going to be detained much the same as what is happening in Guantanamo. Bay. it’s not that people are apathetic, there isn’t a leader to lead the charge, and if there was one, that person would be detained indefinitely with no charges. You couldn’t keep it quiet because we are under surveillance all of the time. Do you have tape over your camera on your lap top? If not they can watch you. Do you have a smart phone, they can find you wherever you hide.

      Wait till there is no cash and everything is run digitally. What then? They can cut you off faster then you can say,”Oh shit.”

      Have you seen these around the country going in every direction and to every city……

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s