(Footage compiled by BuildingWhat.org, music by Slothy (“Professor Jones and Building Seven”))
In case you’re entirely new to the information behind the now twelve-year-old slogan, “9/11 was an inside job,” you might begin by noting that not just two but three World Trade Center buildings (out of seven) fell on the day of the September 11th attacks. You should remember this always, because if the emphasis of the capitalist media is any indication, you are not supposed to know this.
World Trade Center 7, a part of the World Trade Center complex, was a roughly fifty-story skyscraper, fifty stories being about five times the height of the largest building in most counties of the United States. At about 5:30 PM on September 11th, 2001, this giant high-rise, having never been hit by a plane, imploded at nearly free-fall speed almost straight down, accompanied by large clouds of finely pulverized concrete. The building had sustained damage from falling debris earlier in the day, but the sudden and catastrophic nature of its collapse as well as characteristics such as sequenced puffs of smoke running down the sides of it as it fell strongly suggest the detonation of explosives inside the building just prior to and during its final moments. Please see numerous other 9/11-related videos on this site for more information about the technical details of this and others of the events of 9/11, or view the full lecture by physicist Steven Jones* which was sampled in the music track above further down in this post. Below are some questions to get you started from someone who has looked at this information critically for a number of years (me).
First, if the collapse of World Trade Center 7 was the work of Osama bin Laden, why, despite the saturation of all capitalist news media for months with inordinate amounts of other footage of the attacks on New York City, was the first time that you ever heard about Building Seven probably on a quote-unquote “conspiracy” video like this one? Similarly, why did the 9/11 Commission, which was tasked with providing a full explanation of the events of 9/11, not mention a major event like the collapse of Building Seven even one time in their final report? Why has the “official” hypothesis that fire caused its collapse continued to be upheld by government officials in the face of glaringly contradictory data, and even after a majority of Federal experts who had been tasked with studying it concluded that fire was unlikely to be an accurate explanation of its collapse? Are there somethings that the rulers of the U. S. are trying to hide about this event, and is the collapse of Building Seven a window into those secrets?
Furthermore, Building Seven was a highly secure facility which housed the offices of top-level businesses as well as Federal agencies such as the CIA and IRS. If the collapse of Building Seven was due to a controlled demolition, who would have had the means, motive, and opportunity to pull it off? If not Osama bin Laden and his ragtag band of accomplices, who, in contravention of the basic principles of terrorism, denied any involvement in the 9/11 attacks, then who?
Cui bono? (Who benefits?)
*Steven Jones, like not an insignificant number of others in the 9/11 Truth movement (or more than one might expect, anyway), is (or at least was at the time of the above conference) a Reaganite conservative. This goes to show, in my opinion, that people at all levels of socio-political consciousness, including the very naive, can be attracted to the radicalizing inquiry that is the 9/11 Skeptics or 9/11 Truth movement (which, in my opinion, should be understood not as the movement that has the truth about 9/11, but the one that is searching for it after having rejected the official version). This is primarily because, like a layoff that just doesn’t let you pay the bills anymore, physics is physics, and data are data. Where you go with that information, how you interpret it and incorporate that interpretation into your understanding of the socio-political world, whatever that might be when you first encounter it, is another story.
As I mentioned in my last post, I’ll be preparing a lengthier statement on my observations of the successes and failures of what could be called contemporary “conspiracy” research and related social movements and theories as time allows, but I anticipate that it won’t be too far away. For the time being, I will write that although I can’t help but feel disappointed that the more than five years of fairly intense “underground” 9/11 Truth activism from tens of thousands of participants who helped to spread questions and data about 9/11 between 2001 and about 2006, which is when it started getting onto the radar of the capitalist media, despite the general socio-political wake-up call that it gave to millions of individual citizens, did not more quickly give rise to a sustained movement for social justice, I also can’t help but feel encouraged that it contributed to some measure of positive social upheavals. In any case, the lessons of the post-Tea Party, post-Occupy era speak to numerous obstacles which must still be overcome by those of us who are concerned with developing and putting into practice an effective and sustained response to the overwhelming class defeat, mounting austerity policies, and general social counter-revolution which have been burying U. S. workers since the 1970s.
More on these and related topics soon… [END] Permalink: 9/11 Was Still an Inside Job (and Social Conditions Are Still Getting Worse Partly as a Result of It)