Why Do Experts Believe 9/11 Was a Controlled Demolition?

On the fateful day of 9/11, the world watched scenes of destruction so wild that one would think it straight out of a Hollywood production. Beamed live from New York everyone saw the Twin Towers pulverized into a heap of dust. The collapse of these buildings, we were told, was due to two planes smashing into them piloted by Saudi terrorists with amateur flying skills at best; all led by a man in an Afghan cave.

The problem is thousands of experts, including scientists, architects, and engineers, as well as, witnesses such as first responders, disagree with this official conspiracy theory. They believe that a playing flying into the Twin Towers could not bring them down and that there has been a large-scale concerted cover-up that points to the corruption of scientific evidence, the media, and academia.

For example, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth state that the official evidence, like the report from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), only covers pre-collapse events. Professor Niels Harrit, former Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen in the Center of Nano Science, calls the report “academic fraud”.

If these experts are correct then the entire raison d’être for invading Afghanistan (and let us not forget Iraq too) is built, literally on a pile of dust. If Western citizens have been lied to then it brings into doubt the entire nature of the liberal world order. Western citizens would question whether liberalism still stands for objectivity and science. They would be forced to ask whether the wars, they are led into, are for a just cause, and they would have to question whether their media are no more than a propaganda agency working to distort the truth.

With this in mind, if the Twin Towers were not destroyed by planes colliding into them then what did bring them down? Scientific evidence points to a controlled demolition. Certainly, it was not fire for no steel-framed building has ever been pulverized due to fire, let alone one that didn’t even last two hours, that is, up until 9/11. For example, the Windsor Tower in Madrid burned for 26 hours but the building frame was left intact. One may say a plane flying into a building is unprecedented but it is not. The Empire State Building was hit by a bomber in 1945 which exploded upon hitting the building. The building, which did catch light, proved far sturdier than the plane which broke into clearly identifiable pieces strewn in the building and scattered outside on the street below.

Many, like myself, have witnessed the scenes of that day where firefighters reported that the fire in the Twin Towers, not being severe, could be “knocked out with two lines”. The fact is, the fire in the Twin Towers on 9/11, as demonstrated by its thick black smoke, was nowhere near hot enough to melt the steel frame and make it collapse. Yet the entire steel frame was vaporized.

Structural engineer Kamal Obeid says that “a localized failure in a steel-framed building cannot cause a catastrophic collapse like a house of cards at free-fall acceleration” yet the Twin Towers fell at near free-fall speed. This suggests a controlled demolition took place and explosives had to be placed in the building. Indeed, there were 156 eyewitness reports, 121 of them first responders, who described explosions. These witnesses were discarded from the NIST report. One of the witnesses, a firefighter, Christopher Fenyo said that “at that point (after witnessing the explosions), a debate began to rage because the perception was that the building looked like it had been taken out with charges”.

Outside the building explosions, known as “squibs” in the demolition industry were seen pushing out material in the same manner as a controlled demolition. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth describe the Twin Towers as being destroyed by waves of explosions that pulverized the building and its contents. Just like a controlled demolition it came down into its own footprint. Scott Grainger, a Fire Protection Engineer, states that the “collapses were very uniform in nature. Natural collapses due to unplanned events are not uniform”. Niels Harrit analyzing the dust from 911 found multiple indicators that suggest thermite (a military-grade explosive) was used to destroy the Twin Towers.

The fact is we know Iraq was based on a pack of lies. Saddam Hussain had no Weapons of Mass Destruction and had nothing to do with 9/11. Afghanistan didn’t attack the U.S. either, according to the sanctioned conspiracy narrative it was Bin Laden, a Saudi citizen, but he also denied the attack. At any rate, the Taliban said they would hand Bin Laden over if evidence was presented to them, which it wasn’t. These distortions and lies, which benefited transnational liberal capital, were both an act of aggression against the Global South and Western citizens who paid for these wars with their blood and taxes. With this in mind, we must ask if the foundations of these hideous lies which justified terror against the Global South are also mirrored in hideous lies and terror at home with 9/11. Tragically, this is the conclusion of thousands of scientists, architects, and engineers, who dare to speak up.