Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth
"The Important Thing is, Not to Stop Questioning" –
|Contact | Home||
October 10, 2007
Rio de Janeiro
I've very concerned about several things. I wrote to you some time ago with concerns about why you haven't written about the Federal Reserve System. Here is a copy of that letter and your brief reply:
Dear Noam, First of all, I hope you're well. As a constant reader of your work and admirer of your efforts to inform the general public, my recent investigations into the workings of the Federal Reserve System reminded me of how conspiciously absent this critical issue is in your investigations. It is impossible that you have not researched this topic, yet I don't know of any direct instance where it appears in your work. Instead of recommending that I read some author or other, I strongly urge you to put something important out on this subject in a way that only you can do with your vast knowledge and ability to organize information. How is it that you haven't written directly on this crucial matter? Any comments that you have at the moment would be appreciated. At such a time of economic volatility and perhaps collapse, please make this a priority, and open the door to your many readers (including myself) on perhaps the most insidious aspect of the tyrannical nature of our society today.
In that letter excerpt, dated March 15, 2007, I also included the comments by Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tx), as well as the Monetary Report to the Congress of Feb. 14, 2007. Rep. Paul makes an important point:
"Transparency in monetary policy is a goal we should all support. I've often wondered why Congress has to willingly given up its prerogative over monetary policy. Congress in essence has ceded total control of the value of our money to a secretive central bank."
"Transparency." Your reply on the same day was the following:
You're right that I haven't written about the topic, and that it's a very important one. I haven't written about it because I haven't researched it deeply enough, and the reason for that is a judgment of priorities -- whether right or wrong, hard to say, in this and many other cases.
Well, one of the by-products of this "ceding [of] total control" happens to be the 9/11 attacks. This is a subject which you "have researched…deeply," and obviously your "judgment of priorities" in this case has been that it is "right."
Therefore, I want to pose a direct questions to you, and I'll take as my starting point comments that you made on the ZNet Blog, "9-11: Institutional Analysis vs. Conspiracy Theory":
"I think the Bush administration would have had to be utterly insane to try anything like what is alleged, for their own narrow interests, and do not think that serious evidence has been provided to support claims about actions that would not only be outlandish, for their own interests, but that have no remote historical parallel. The effects, however, are all too clear, namely, what I just mentioned: diverting activism and commitment away from the very serious ongoing crimes of state."
"Who's conspiracy theory" is more plausible? So, here comes the question: have you looked at the evidence? If so, what evidence? Here are some things that you might want to consider.
Steven Jones, Ph.D., BYU:
"The first time I saw Building 7 come down, straight and fast, I realized, this is very curious. I hadn't seen it until just about, oh, it's been about a year and a half now ago. And as soon as it, in a sense I was hooked. I figured – you know – as a scientist, I can't just ignore this data. I could see that building come straight down. I' seen demolitions before – controlled demolitions – it looked just like that. You know, a kink in the middle. And then that buildings just come straight down, almost at free fall speed. And pretty quick I'm learning about molten metal pools under both towers after they collapsed, and Building 7. Now, Building 7 wasn't even hit by a jet! You know, and yet it comes down, and it's got this molten metal underneath. Where did that come from? I have a sample of this molten metal. Previously molten metal. Here. Just a tiny sample. This is all we need. I brought it along with me at the last minute. I thought, 'I'll throw that in.' And, by analyzing this, we've determined it is not molten aluminum from the plane, ok. Indeed, it contains a great deal of iron, which is the product of the thermite reaction. Now thermite can be purchased on E-Bay, and many people – I show it in my class, physics, and I'll be showing it this fall in my physical science class – it's commonly shown. It's a very brilliant reaction. You have this white flare, this white dust, which is aluminum oxide coming off. And then this yellow-hot, molten metal, just white-yellow-hot, flowing out of this reaction. Now this thermite is so hot, this molten iron, especially when you mix sulfur in – it's called thermate – and it'll just cut through steel, through structural steel, for example, like a knife through butter. And we also see this yellow-hot molten metal with white wispy ash pouring out of the South Tower just minutes before it's collapse. I've show this video. It's just amazing. Photographs of that. It's in the NIST report. And the evidence is just piling up. This is – it has the characteristics – not of molten aluminum, and not of molten – its not just structural steel that's somehow melting. No. There's very little chromium. But it does have sulfur. And manganese. And some other elements that are characteristic, you see? It's like a fingerprint that the criminal left behind. This carries with it evidence. Well, how was this done? What was used? This chain of events leads me to reluctantly conclude that indeed, there does seem to be insider – in other words, not just hijacked planes – but also others involved, setting these thermite cutter charges in the World Trade Center to bring them down. And his again leads to the conclusion that our Constitution , which is our heritage as Americans – I love my country, I love the Constitution, and the people in America – I'm afraid that our Constitution is literally hanging by a thread at this stage."
Kevin Barrett, University of Wisconsin, Madison:
"Personally, I feel that the whole core of the 9/11 question is the issue of, whether the three World Trade Center buildings were demolished with explosives or whether they fell down for some other reason, such as being damaged by plane crashes or fires. And, I think that at this point, the evidence is in. Anybody who's kept up with the critique of the official story in this area knows that at this point, the evidence is very convincing that all three of the buildings were taken down with explosives and controlled demolitions. For the government to try to disprove that at this point, or to try to support its case, I think would be very difficult, because they hid all the evidence. They prevented any kind of forensic investigation. All the steel was shipped off as fast as possible to China and melted down for scrap. So, it was impossible to test the steel for scientific explosives. Fortunately, some remains and Professor Steven Jones has gotten his hands on multiple sources worth of steel. And he's run tests for these found traces of thermate, an enhanced version of thermite, which is an explosive device that can take out steel. Cut right through it like knife through butter. I think that, at this point, no rational person who looks at the evidence can argue against the proposition that the three World Trade Center buildings – the Twin Towers and WTC 7 especially – were taken down in controlled demolitions. That I think is by now is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, as David Griffin has said, and as everybody who has looked into it I think from a fair-minded perspective agrees. …I think what I'm doing is angling on the long-term. In the short-term, I may have some problems. It may be a little harder to get rehired next semester. Maybe not, though. I think a lot sooner than most people realize, 9/11 is going to blow wide open. The official report doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Its very simple. Any trained academic, anybody with any critical thinking skills at all, can read the official report, and read David Ray Griffin's refutation, and the report just falls to shreds. Now, anybody who's willing to live with that report as the official record of the most important event of our century, has no business calling themselves an intellectual, or a teacher, or anything. I mean, it's that obvious.[University of Wisconsin-Madison Lecturer; Neil Hyden, "For the Record"; from "9/11 Revisited"]
Please also see the presentation by Richard Gage, AIA, Architect: "How the Towers Fell."
Are you prepared to revise your previous statements about the events of September 11?:
"The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every [attack]. I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons. I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations." [Bin Laden, Al Jazeera, within days of the 9.11 attacks; "Loose Change"]
Are you prepared to defy those who adhere to the "official story," what should be called the "official conspiracy theory," such as that forwarded by Eager?:
…However, the building was not able to withstand the intense heat of the jet fuel fire. While it was impossible for the fuel-rich, diffuse-flame fire to burn at a temperature high enough to melt the steel, its quick ignition and intense heat caused the steel to lose at least half its strength and to deform, causing buckling or crippling. This weakening and deformation caused a few floors to fall, while the weight of the stories above them crushed the floors below, initiating a domino collapse. [Eager & Musso, "Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation," JOM, 53 (12), 2001; Thomas Lord Professor of Materials Engineering and Materials Systems; graduate research student; MIT]
Can you deny the testimony of Giuliani:
"What's going on now is a massive rescue effort… I saw people jumping out of the World Trade Center. I saw some of the firefighters who I know going into the building, so. We were in a building in which we were trapped for about 10, 15 minutes. And we set up headquarters at 75 Barkley Street, which was right there with the police commissioner, the fire commissioner, the head of emergency management. And we were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was going to collapse." [my emphasis; ABC interview with Peter Jennings]
"I have not seen, until recently, a protective steel structure that has collapsed in a fire." [Jonathan Barnett, Worcester Polytechnic Institute].
Or the testimony of Philip Morreli:
"I go downstairs. The foreman tells me to go down to remove the containers. As I'm walking by the main freightcar of the building, in the corridor – that's when I got blown. I mean, the impact of the explosion, of whatever happened, it threw me to the floor. And that's when everything started happening. …I was racing. I was going towards the bathroom. All the sudden, I opened the door. I didn't know if was a bathroom, and all of the sudden a big impact happened again. And all the ceiling tile was falling down, the light fixtures were falling, swinging out of the ceiling. And I come running out the door, and everything – the walls were down – and now I started running towards the parking lots. There was a lot of smoke down there. There was a lot of people screamin'. People came with us running up the ramps. …You know, you gotta go clear across the hole from 1 to 2 World Trade Center. You know, I mean, that's the way you gotta' run. And then, all of the sudden, it happened all over again. Something else hit us to the floor. Right in the basement you felt it. Walls were caving in. Everything that was goin' on. I mean, I know people that got killed in the basement. I know that got broken legs in the basement. People got reconstructive surgery because the walls hit 'em in the face. " [construction worker, North Tower, sub-basement four; " 9/11 Mysteries"]
Or William Rodriguez:
"…and all of the sudden, we heard an explosion. It was a huge explosion that came from under my feet. Meaning, it came from the sublevels between B1 and B3. And there was a huge explosion at the top of the building. You could hear the difference from the bottom and all the way through the top. The one from the top, which was actually seconds after, was heard very far away. The one at the basement was pretty loud, and you felt your actual feet moving with the floor. The tremor that is sent through floors, that the walls cracked, and the false ceiling totally collapsed. And that's when the person name Felipe David came running into our office saying, 'Explosion, explosion, explosion.' And when I saw him, he has all his skin from under his armpits, missing pieces on his face. …As I went up, I remember listening to small explosions on the upper floors. And these small explosions were not coming from the area of the impact. It was coming from lower floors… Were heard, 'Boom.' When we heard, 'Boom,' inside the building, the North Tower. We heard, 'Bah, bah, bah, bah, bah.' And on the security radio we heard, 'We lost 65, we lost 65,' meaning the 65th floor collapsed. And, as we went down the stairwell, you could hear the actual collapsing, inside the buildings. You heard rumble. You heard the cracking of the walls. I mean, pieces falling right next to us, of the actual building." [last person to leave towers alive; "9/11 Mysteries"]
Please Noam, you need to come out and make a public statement on these matters. You need to put your weight behind those that have made valiant efforts to bring the truth to light, and reverse the growing opinion that you are a "left gatekeeper."
In closing, I'm sure you've seen the recent article by John Crewdson which came out in the Chicago Tribune on October 2, " New revelations in attack on American spy ship":
"I'm angry! I'm seething with anger! Forty years, and I'm seething with anger! …They tried to lie their way out of it! I don't believe that for a minute! You just don't shoot at a ship at sea without identifying it, making sure of your target!" [Bryce Lockwood, Russian language export, aboard the USS Liberty]
Forty years is a long time to wait. With that in mind, I hope you do what's "right."
Rio de Janeiro