The May polling of 643 New Yorkers (including respondents in all of New York City’s five boroughs) by the independent Siena Research Institute shows meaningful levels of doubt and concern regarding the truth about what happened that day, with only 60 percent of New Yorkers ready to “move on”, and 48 percent in favor of the Manhattan District Attorney or New York City Council opening a new investigation into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.

The poll finds:

• 1 in 3 New Yorkers were unaware of Building 7’s collapse (the skyscraper was not hit by an airplane; it collapsed seven hours after the Twin Towers), only 25 percent have ever seen video footage of the collapse, and 86 percent were unable to name the building;

• Of those aware of Building 7’s collapse, 24 percent believe it was a controlled demolition that brought the building down, 23 percent are unsure, and 49 percent believe it was caused by fires;

• 36 percent of all respondents are inclined to believe critics who argue against the government’s explanation that the collapse was caused by fires, including a group of 1,500 architects and engineers who say no steel-framed skyscraper has ever succumbed to fire. Forty percent are inclined to believe the government’s account, and 23 percent are unsure;

• 48 percent of those polled are in favor of a new investigation into Building 7’s collapse, compared to 44 percent opposed and 8 percent who don’t know or refused to answer.

• 28 percent — more than 1 in 4 — believe the Twin Towers were brought down with explosives or some other demolition devices in addition to being hit by airplanes.

• In sum, 36 percent say they are “not satisfied that we know the whole truth about that day, and it is time to get to the bottom of what happened,” versus 60 percent who ten years later say they are “satisfied that we understand well enough what happened and it’s time to move on.”

The poll findings can be found at www.siena.edu/sri/research and the Remember Building 7 campaign site, www.RememberBuilding7.org.

The 30-second advertising spots produced for Remember Building 7 feature 9/11 family members, architects and engineers who call for more information about how Building 7 collapsed. Video of the building’s free-fall is shown. (The spot, second in a series that began last September, may be viewed at www.RememberBuilding7.org) The spots are airing in the New York area through June 26 on fifteen different cable channels, including New York 1 News, MSNBC, CNN, Comedy Central, HGTV, Logo, Bio, MSG, YES, VH1, CNBC and Bravo, among others.

$100,000 used to purchase the spots was raised from contributions made through the RememberBuilding7.org site.

“As we approach the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 tragedy, it is important to note that there are significant numbers of people who still don’t feel their questions have been fully answered,” says Manny Badillo, Director of Outreach for the New York City Coalition for Accountability Now (NYC CAN), a co-sponsor of the Remember Building 7 campaign. The other cosponsor, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth), has gathered over 1,500 signatures from architects and engineers who say the government’s 2008 account by the National Institute of Standards and Technology of Building 7’s collapse is physically impossible, and that its fall was due to a controlled demolition.

Badillo, a former member of the U.S. Air Force, lost his uncle on 9/11 and appears in the TV ad. He says that the government has not answered 70 percent of 9/11 families’ questions about what happened that day.

“The story of 9/11 is not complete without the voices of patriotic Americans who question the official account of what happened on 9/11. Our world has never been the same since then – it’s time for more information,” states Badillo.

William Brinnier, a New York architect who also appears in the TV spot, notes, “It’s remarkable that 1 out of 3 people don’t know a third building collapsed on 9/11, but it’s encouraging to see that when they are informed of the 1,500 architects and engineers who question the government’s findings, more people support a new investigation than don’t.”

Brinnier lost a friend, WTC construction manager Frank DeMartini, who was responsible for rescuing people from the Twin Towers before his death there on 9/11.

The post Poll: 48% of New Yorkers Support Investigation of WTC 7 appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

Ex-U.S. Sen. Mike Gravel is likewise agitating to place initiatives on the 2012 ballot in California and other states mandating a thorough investigation of the 9/11 disaster, including alleged manipulation of the country’s air security system just prior to the disaster
.
Here in San Diego, the so-called San Diego 9/11 Truth Group – one of the most hardcore of the 9/11 conspiracy organizations – claims its monthly meetings in the San Diego area community of Hillcrest routinely attract up to 200 seekers, reflecting a steady increase in attendance in the last several years.

The 9/11 conspiracy push has been dismissed by both liberals and conservatives as a preposterous set of scenarios conjured on a mythic scale.

Some leftists have compared the campaign to the workings of the Christic Institute, which in the 1980s charged that the U.S. government had for decades sponsored a secret team of operatives involved in everything from the murders of journalists to the bombings of dissidents in such countries as Nicaragua. Never mind that a 1985 lawsuit inititated by the institute under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act was dismissed by a judge prior to trial, with the organization ordered to pay defendants about $1 million in damages.

However, such considerations have hardly fazed the determination of a core group of 9/11 true believers dedicated to proving that traitors within the federal government colluded to bring on the momentous disaster with the intention of fostering heightened world tensions and empowering various elite economic groups, such as the vast U.S. military-industrial complex.

“Our message is gaining traction,” said Dwain Deets, a retired flight research engineer at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration who now edits the 9/11 Investigator newspaper.

Deets, a member of the San Diego 9/11 Truth Group as well as the liberal Progressive Democrats For America, will be among the guests on Ventura’s “Conspiracy Theory” 9/11 segment next month.

He stood last Thursday in front of a sprawling 9/11 exhibit on a walkway near North Harbor Drive during a Veterans Day celebration.

The impromptu setting included a dozen or so booths manned by members of Veterans for Peace and kindred groups and entrepreneurs.

A block away, a parade honoring U.S. servicemen featured military marching bands and politicians like liberal Rep. BoB Filner (D-Calif.).

Deets pointed to oversized photographs mounted on easels depicting Building 7’s demise on 9/11 in second-by-second sequence – a train of events he said indicates that the skyscraper was bombed from the inside.

The National Institute of Science and Technology “had recordings of explosions in the vicinity (of the structure), but withheld this evidence until well after issuing their final report,” Deets claims, adding that the account did not even mention the possibility of explosions.

Sceptics of the 9/11 conspiracy line have been especially critical of accusations that longtime Republican officials like Cheney could have been a part of such widespread intrigue involving hundreds of connivers.

Indeed, news of such subterfuge would likely destroy the conservative movement for good, as well as bring down a long list of military contractors and associated firms and interests.

Deets nevertheless noted that the World Trade Center housed such tenants as the Department of Defense, the Securities and Exchange Commission and various other federal agencies. “The SEC was investigating Enron,” he suggested, emphasizing that the company would have benefitted from the World Trade Center carnage.

Deets stressed that the 9/11 coverup is being facilitated not only by Republicans, but by their Democratic counterparts.

Democrats “are stonewalling any investigation” in 9/11, he said. People attending the Veterans Day festivities who walked by the 9/11 showcase displayed a mix of emotions, from bafflement to mild agreement, as they viewed the hazy, black and white photographs of the deadly onslaught.

“Maybe there’s something to it … Nothing would surprise me these days,” said Marita Bardoni, whose brother recently returned from a two-year military stint in Iraq. “It is odd that everything has changed for the worse since it (the 9/11 attack) happened.”

But World War II veteran William Hemmings was having none of it.

“If any of this were true, Cheney would be lynched from the Washington Monument in a minute,” Hemmings said. “A conspiracy supposedly this big could never be kept secret. Somebody would have stepped forward by now.”

Frank Green is a veteran journalist and lives in the San Diego area. He can be reached at fjkbgreen@cox.net

The post Counterpunch: A Kinder, Gentler Hit Piece appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

And 9/11 is far from over: it triggered what Western leaders have declared an “endless” or “generational” war on terror. Even President Obama stated in March 2009 that the Afghan-Pakistan border region “has become the most dangerous place in the world” for the American people. …

The September 11th attacks have done more to shape world conflict in this century than any other event. More resources are being committed to the resulting “war on terror” than to the foundational issue of the survival of our eco-system. Additionally, the “war on terror” is being waged in the oil-rich Middle East, whose promise of vast oil supplies is delaying the development of alternative energy sources.

As we saw above, in the past year new scientific information has pointed strongly to the use of a high-tech military explosive (nanothermite) in the vertical free-fall collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7. Many firefighters heard explosions in the basements, and nine years later, organized firefighters are strongly urging a new investigation.[10] The cell phone calls from the airliners are now seriously in doubt,[11] and it has recently been demonstrated that Osama bin Laden probably died in December 2001.[12] The FBI, in any case, offers no evidence for his responsibility in the attacks.[13] The two 9/11 Commission heads, and its senior counsel, have declared that the Commission was lied to.[14]

It is therefore imperative that the truth about 9/11 be established with certainty. It is urgent and essential that all professionals who convey information about 9/11 to the public be equipped with the best possible evidence, so that decision-making about our most pressing issues is based on sound knowledge. …

There have been dozens of reputable polls, in the United States, Canada, and other countries, measuring public beliefs about responsibility for 9/11.[23]

These polls consistently show that 30-40% of people either doubt the official story, or believe that the US government allowed the attacks to happen, or that the government was directly complicit.

A 2006 Time Magazine article reported:

“A Scripps-Howard poll of 1,010 adults last month found that 36% of Americans consider it “very likely” or “somewhat likely” that government officials either allowed the attacks to be carried out or carried out the attacks themselves. Thirty-six percent adds up to a lot of people. This is not a fringe phenomenon. It is a mainstream political reality.”[24]

A 2008 World Public Opinion poll of 17 nations outside the United States found that majorities in only nine of the countries believe Al Qaeda carried out the attacks.[25]

In contrast to this widespread public skepticism, very little of the scientific literature on 9/11 (which is listed in Part 6 below) has been reviewed in the mainstream press. The public has thus had minimal access to research materials in libraries (owing to the absence of reviews) or to balanced media investigations into the emerging evidence.

The post Ethical Reflections on the 9/11 Controversy appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.

Chandler also explains the important point of how NIST sidestepped investigating explosions and explosives by “setting up an artificially high threshold of interest”.  He points out that they ignored any testimony or recordings of explosions that would not register 130-140 dB at a one kilometer distance, a criterion that they established using RDX (one of the loudest explosives) in a scenario that produced a far higher sound level than other possible uses of explosives to bring down the building.  Chandler states:

Then they turned around and used sound level as the sole criterion for deciding whether the use of explosives was a credible hypothesis. By this maneuver, they sidestepped investigating testimony of explosives or possible evidence of explosive residues. This is just one more instance of fraudulent behavior on the part of the NIST investigation of the World Trade Center disaster.

It should be noted, however, that care is necessary in advancing scientific evidence via video media since it has been used to insert numerous hoax and erroneous claims time and again in the history of the 9/11 movement.

One example was in 2006, when Rick Siegel made a video called ‘9/11 Eyewitness‘, which claimed to be analyzing sounds of explosions coming from the WTC destruction from across the river.  However, the video was found to be advocating a series of nonsense claims:

9/11 Eyewitness is a DVD by Rick Siegel purporting to teach the truth about the attack on the World Trade Center. Instead of elucidating the truth, however, the piece seems designed to hide the reality of the explosive demolition of the Twin Towers by surrounding footage of the demolitions with a verneer of vapid claims and pseudo-scientific analysis. The DVD teaches us that helicopters were instrumental in the Towers’ destruction and that it was a “nuclear attack”.
http://911review.com/reviews/911eyewitness/index.html

The analytical work of David Chandler is careful and methodical and in some cases he even reproduces the methods he used.  For example, in his analysis of the freefall aspects of the destruction of Building 7, Chandler created a video to respond to critics:

WTC7 in Freefall–No Longer Controversial
The previous analysis of the freefall acceleration was criticized (legitimately) for using a horizontal calibration measurement for analyzing purely vertical motion. Any distortion or stretching of the video could throw off the measurement. In this new video, the calibration utilizes NIST’s data for the heights of the roofline and the 29th floor to do a vertical calibration. The result is a measurement even closer to idealized freefall: 9.88 m/s^2.

For many more videos, please see David Chandler’s website, 9/11 Speak Out

The post WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions appeared first on 9/11 Truth News.