A Perspective on 9/11 Complicity: The Case for a New Investigation.
On September 11, 2001, the world witnessed an unprecedented attack on the United States, leading to the tragic loss of nearly 3,000 lives. The official explanation provided by the U.S. government has been widely accepted; however, a significant number of individuals, including 9/11 family members, engineers, architects, and other experts, have raised questions about the official narrative. The 9/11 truth movement argues that the events of that day were not solely the result of a failure to prevent a terrorist attack but rather a more complex scenario involving possible complicity or cover-up by elements within the U.S. government. Below, key points supporting this perspective are summarized.
WTC 7: A Building Collapse That Defies Explanation
World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) is often referred to as the "smoking gun" of 9/11. Unlike the Twin Towers, WTC 7 was not struck by a plane, yet it collapsed symmetrically into its own footprint at near free-fall speed in the late afternoon of September 11th. The official explanation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) attributes the collapse to office fires, but this conclusion has been heavily criticized.
In 2020, a study conducted by Dr. Leroy Hulsey, a professor of civil engineering at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, challenged the NIST report. Dr. Hulsey’s team concluded that the collapse of WTC 7 could not have occurred due to fire alone. The study found that the building's collapse exhibited characteristics of a controlled demolition, a view further supported by physicist David Chandler, who demonstrated that WTC 7 fell at free-fall speed for approximately 2.25 seconds. This evidence suggests that the official account cannot fully explain the collapse, leading many to call for a new investigation.
Saudi Arabia's Alleged Involvement: A Suppressed Connection
The role of Saudi Arabia in the 9/11 attacks has been a subject of controversy and speculation. Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were Saudi nationals, yet the U.S. government's investigation into potential Saudi involvement has been criticized as incomplete and possibly obstructive.
In recent years, new evidence has surfaced, including a video brought to light by 9/11 families, that suggests a more direct connection between Saudi officials and the hijackers than previously acknowledged. The families of 9/11 victims have long accused the U.S. government of covering up Saudi Arabia's involvement, and they have continued to push for the release of classified documents that may further implicate the Saudi government. The fact that this evidence has been suppressed for so long raises serious questions about why the U.S. government would protect an ally potentially complicit in the worst terrorist attack on American soil.
The Failure of Air Defense: A Puzzling Inaction
On the morning of September 11th, the United States' air defense system failed in a manner that has baffled many observers. Despite multiple hijackings, no fighter jets were scrambled in time to intercept the planes before they reached their targets. The 9/11 Commission Report noted numerous failures and inconsistencies in the response by the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD), even considering referring NORAD officials to the Justice Department for lying about their actions on that day.
Recently, it was revealed that the New York Deputy Mayor requested Navy fighter jets to protect the city on 9/11, yet no jets arrived. This lack of response raises questions about whether the failures were due to incompetence or something more deliberate. The absence of adequate air defense has been one of the key points raised by 9/11 truth activists, who argue that the U.S. military's failure to act suggests a possible stand-down order or other complicity.
The 9/11 Families: Unanswered Questions and Suppressed Testimonies
The 9/11 truth movement was largely spearheaded by the families of the victims, who were dissatisfied with the government's investigation. The Family Steering Committee, a group formed by 9/11 families, submitted over 1,000 questions to the 9/11 Commission, but they reported that 70% of these questions were never addressed.
Whistleblowers like former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds have alleged that the U.S. government had prior knowledge of the attacks but failed to act. Despite promises to investigate these claims, the 9/11 Commission never interviewed Edmonds. Additionally, 9/11 family member Patty Casazza has stated that whistleblowers informed her that the government knew the exact date and targets of the attacks in advance but did nothing to prevent them. This account is supported by the testimony of David Schippers, former Chief Investigative Counsel for the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, who claimed that FBI agents tried to warn federal officials about the impending attacks weeks in advance, only to be ignored.
The Twin Towers: Evidence of Controlled Demolition?
The collapse of the Twin Towers remains one of the most scrutinized aspects of 9/11. While the official explanation attributes the collapse to the impact of the planes and the subsequent fires, many experts, including architect Richard Gage, have pointed out evidence that suggests controlled demolition:
- Symmetrical Collapse: Both towers collapsed symmetrically, despite the asymmetrical damage caused by the plane impacts.
- Rapid Onset of Collapse: The collapse of each tower began suddenly, with no visible signs of the top sections tilting or falling off-center.
- Molten Metal: Witnesses reported seeing molten metal in the debris, which some scientists believe could be evidence of the use of explosives.
- Explosive Ejections: Video footage shows large sections of the buildings being ejected laterally at high speed, consistent with the use of explosives.
Pre-9/11 Warnings: Ignored or Suppressed?
Numerous warnings were given to the U.S. government before 9/11, many of which were ignored or downplayed. For example, Richard Clarke, former National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection, and Counter-terrorism, has stated that the CIA withheld information about the hijackers from him and other key officials. Additionally, foreign intelligence agencies, including those of Israel and Russia, warned the U.S. about impending attacks.
The testimony of whistleblowers like Sibel Edmonds and the statements of 9/11 family members further suggest that the U.S. government had detailed knowledge of the attacks before they occurred. The failure to act on this information raises serious questions about the true nature of the government's response to the 9/11 attacks.
Peer-Reviewed Science and the Truth Movement
The scientific community has also weighed in on the 9/11 debate. In April 2022, Adam Taylor, a contributor to the "Debunking the 9/11 Debunkers" blog, published a peer-reviewed article in an engineering journal that challenged the official narrative of the Twin Towers' collapse. This adds to a growing body of scientific literature that questions the government's explanation.
Additionally, the discovery of nanothermite, a highly energetic material found in the dust from Ground Zero, has led some scientists to suggest that explosives were used to bring down the towers. This evidence, while controversial, has not been adequately addressed by the official investigations.
The arguments presented by the 9/11 truth movement are rooted in a deep skepticism of the official narrative and a desire for transparency and accountability. The evidence discussed here, from the collapse of WTC 7 to the failures of air defense, raises significant questions about the events of September 11th and the U.S. government's response. As more evidence comes to light, the call for a new, independent investigation continues to grow, driven by the belief that the truth about 9/11 has yet to be fully uncovered.
