Speakers present '9/11 Truth' to CU

Written by CUIndependent in News on Oct 31, 2006 0:00 / comments

Heat, explosion patterns amongst reasons for conspiracy theory

Was the success of the 9/11 terrorist attacks a result of military incompetence? Did certain elements of the U.S. military plan 9/11? Did a few “bad apples” in the government know of the plan beforehand and do nothing in order to further their agenda?

These questions were raised by Fran Shure, who represented the Colorado 9/11 Visibility Project on Sunday as she opened the “Scholars for 9/11 Truth” presentation to an estimated crowd of 300. The presentation was co-sponsored by Colorado 9/11 Visibility and 9/11Truth.org. Speakers included: Dr. Kevin Barrett, an Islamic studies professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison; Kevin Ryan, a chemist formerly with Underwriters Laboratories; and Dr. Steven Jones, a physicist formerly with Brigham Young University.

“Our government sacrificed 3,000 lives, started two wars, killed hundreds of thousands of people and destroyed our international relations and the Constitution in the name of a lie. Does anyone here want to know the truth?” Ryan said.

According to Barrett, the first speaker of the event, the purpose of the presentation was to tell the truth that the government failed to deliver to its people.

“I’m a social scientist, and Steve (Jones) and Kevin (Ryan) are scientists,” Barrett said. “The CIA has labeled us ‘enemy combatants’ and we are now under investigation because we are a threat to power. Science is supposed to be about truth, not power. We will give you the truth.”

Barrett went on to outline the history of “false flag operations,” a term he defines as contrived, catastrophic disasters carried out by governments and corporations in a way that appears to be the work of another organization. False flag operations, he said, are meant to shock the public from its moorings so that those responsible can feed whatever reality they like to its people.

“Unfortunately, deceit as a means to war is the rule, not the exception, and 9/11 was the mother of all false flag attacks,” Barrett said.

Barrett asserted that governmental deceit has been a practice dating back to the 1600s, beginning with the most famous case: the framing of British-Catholic rebel Guy Fawkes, whose capture preceded the British entry into the 100 Years’ War with Catholic countries.

Barrett also accused President Roosevelt of having known ahead of time about Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, outlined “Operation Northwoods,” in which the CIA planned terrorist attacks against U.S. cities and discussed a staged plane shoot-down in order to justify going to war with Cuba in the 1960s.

“I’m suspicious of how easy it is for people with lots of money and an agenda to manipulate the public,” Boulder resident Rayleigh Resk said. “The presentation has just made it clear to me. How would I know?”

Resk said he was also impressed by how knowledgeable the speakers were, and expressed surprise by how much more convincing their arguments were as opposed to the reports issued by the government.

Another audience member swayed by the arguments presented by speakers was Charles Tepia, a student from Naropa University.

“These guys present themselves as very intellectual, and their arguments as something to be taken seriously,” Tepia said.

Ryan said the official reports issued by organizations such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) are easy to debunk because their investigations are “deceptive and unscientific at every step.”

“‘Rolling Stone’ says that we must cling to the official false story until conspiracy theorists come up with something better,” Ryan said. “We can’t afford to cling to the official story, it is killing us.”

Ryan described his former employer, Underwriters Laboratories (UL), which fired him for questions he raised after NIST filed its initial 9/11 report. UL was the organization that certified all the steel used in the construction of the World Trade Center towers.

“Buildings don’t collapse because of fire,” Ryan said. “Before 9/11, no skyscraper has ever collapsed from a fire and no buildings since then have collapsed from a fire.”

He said steel, depending on its quality, melts between 2,500 to 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit and loses half its strength at 1,100 degrees. Even when NIST manipulated variable factors during its tests, such as testing at a lower fire-proofing than the buildings were rated at and over-ventilating test fires with oxygen, the highest temperatures the steel structures of the towers were exposed to was no more than 600 degrees.

Ryan also said that because of their integrated structural integrity, both of the towers could lose up to 25 percent of their weight-bearing columns and remain stable while bearing up to 2,000 percent of the columns’ live-load capacity. Tower One only lost 14 percent from the plane collision, while Tower Two lost 15 percent.

The only possible explanation for the sudden collapse of the towers was an internal demolition, Ryan said. He explained the collapses exhibited all the characteristics of a demolition, including a near free-fall speed collapse with a sudden onset and evidence of squibs (initiators used in the demolition industry to set off an explosion) shooting out of the side of the buildings.

Ryan also pointed out there were no reports that mentioned the 118 eyewitness accounts of demolitions during the collapse, including those from responding firefighter Kenneth Rogers.

“There was an explosion in the South Tower and I kept watching. Floor after floor after floor. One floor under another after another and when it hit about the fifth floor, I figured it was a bomb, because it looked like a synchronized deliberate kind of thing,” Rogers said.

Jones, the final speaker, continued with the theory of an internal demolition, focusing on the seventh tower of the World Trade Center.

“Building Seven was not hit by a plane, yet it collapsed as completely and rapidly as towers one and two,” said Jones, who announced his retirement from BYU on Oct. 21, citing continued disputes with the university over his research into 9/11.

Jones described the collapse of the seventh tower as defying the laws of physics. If the building had collapsed at a result of fire, as official reports stated, the tower’s destruction worked completely against the Law of Conservation of Momentum, he said.

“The government’s explanation is the conspiracy theory here,” Jones said. “This is what should be tossed out the window.”

The conservation law, as it pertains to the building’s collapse, asserts that the lower floors would slow the fall of the building as momentum was transferred between the moving and static floors. Jones and his colleague at BYU, mathematics professor Kenneth Kuttler, found that, while taking into account the law, the fastest the building could have collapsed was in 8.3 seconds. When Building Seven fell it was recorded at 6.5 seconds.

Jones clarified that the calculations had been reviewed and found to be correct three separate times.

“What did NIST do to address the conflicting free-fall times of the tower? They made absolutely no mention of Building Seven in their reports,” Jones said.

Jones continued to cite the evidence of demolition in the destruction of Building Seven as Ryan had done with towers one and two.

In a series of pictures illustrating the towers’ destruction, Jones showed that just before the collapse, Building Seven showed kinking in the middle of the structure, a common occurrence during the detonation of explosives due to the snap of support columns. He also said the residues of thermite and sulfur, both common chemicals found in pyrotechnic materials, were found from the steel of all three towers.

“You know, I don’t think the average person believes very much of what the government says, but when they don’t allow independent investigations into things like this, and these supposed scientific institutions like NIST restrict access to their findings, then what are we supposed to think?” Tepia said. “I mean, if you can’t trust science, then who do you believe?”

All three speakers said they had been threatened for expressing their views on 9/11 at some point during their campaigning. Both Ryan and Jones lost their jobs over their theories, and Barrett is currently being threatened with termination from UW-Madison over a recent radio interview. However, Barrett reiterated the importance of their work, saying that those who choose truth over power are “walking the path of prophets and scholars.”

“For these government elite, the people are the enemy, to be treated as objects of manipulation,” Barrett said.

To view a documentary of these and other findings visit: www.loosechange911.com.

Related posts:

1. Journalist, surgeon present on Middle Eastern Violence
2. "An Inconvenient Truth" to be screened on campus
3. Haunted Boulder
4. Itchy throat? Runny nose? Could be mold