Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition And 'In

[Guest guest]

J

Mon, 13 Jun 2005 18:20:16 -0000

Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled

Demolition And 'In

 

 

 

 

Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled

Demolition And 'Inside Job'

 

Highly recognized former chief economist in Labor Department now

doubts official 9/11 story, claiming suspicious facts and evidence

cover-up indicate government foul play and possible criminal

implications. June 12, 2005

 

By Greg Szymanski

 

A former chief economist in the Labor Department during President

Bush's first term now believes the official story about the collapse

of the WTC is 'bogus,' saying it is more likely that a controlled

demolition destroyed the Twin Towers and adjacent Building No. 7.

 

" If demolition destroyed three steel skyscrapers at the World Trade

Center on 9/11, then the case for an 'inside job' and a government

attack on America would be compelling, " said Morgan Reynolds, Ph.D, a

former member of the Bush team who also served as director of the

Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis

headquartered in Dallas, TX.

 

Reynolds, now a professor emeritus at Texas A & M University, also

believes it's 'next to impossible' that 19 Arab Terrorists alone

outfoxed the mighty U.S. military, adding the scientific conclusions

about the WTC collapse may hold the key to the entire mysterious plot

behind 9/11.

 

" It is hard to exaggerate the importance of a scientific debate over

the cause(s) of the collapse of the twin towers and building 7, " said

Reynolds this week from his offices at Texas A & M. " If the official

wisdom on the collapses is wrong, as I believe it is, then policy

based on such erroneous engineering analysis is not likely to be

correct either. The government's collapse theory is highly vulnerable

on its own terms. Only professional demolition appears to account for

the full range of facts associated with the collapse of the three

buildings.

 

" More importantly, momentous political and social consequences would

follow if impartial observers concluded that professionals imploded

the WTC. Meanwhile, the job of scientists, engineers and impartial

researchers everywhere is to get the scientific and engineering

analysis of 9/11 right. "

 

However, Reynolds said " getting it right in today's security state'

remains challenging because he claims explosives and structural

experts have been intimidated in their analyses of the collapses of

9/11.

 

From the beginning, the Bush administration claimed that burning jet

fuel caused the collapse of the towers. Although many independent

investigators have disagreed, they have been hard pressed to disprove

the government theory since most of the evidence was removed by FEMA

prior to independent investigation.

 

Critics claim the Bush administration has tried to cover-up the

evidence and the recent 9/11 Commission has failed to address the

major evidence contradicting the official version of 9/11.

 

Some facts demonstrating the flaws in the government jet fuel theory

include:

 

-- Photos showing people walking around in the hole in the North Tower

where 10,000 gallons of jet fuel supposedly was burning..

 

--When the South Tower was hit, most of the North Tower's flames had

already vanished, burning for only 16 minutes, making it relatively

easy to contain and control without a total collapse.

 

--The fire did not grow over time, probably because it quickly ran out

of fuel and was suffocating, indicating without added explosive

devices the firs could have been easily controlled.

 

--FDNY fire fighters still remain under a tight government gag order

to not discuss the explosions they heard, felt and saw. FAA personnel

are also under a similar 9/11 gag order.

 

--Even the flawed 9/11 Commission Report acknowledges that " none of

the [fire] chiefs present believed that a total collapse of either

tower was possible. "

 

-- Fire had never before caused steel-frame buildings to collapse

except for the three buildings on 9/11, nor has fire collapsed any

steel high rise since 9/11.

 

-- The fires, especially in the South Tower and WTC-7, were relatively

small.

 

-- WTC-7 was unharmed by an airplane and had only minor fires on the

seventh and twelfth floors of this 47-story steel building yet it

collapsed in less than 10 seconds.

 

-- WTC-5 and WTC-6 had raging fires but did not collapse despite much

thinner steel beams.

 

-- In a PBS documentary, Larry Silverstein, the WTC leaseholder, told

the fire department commander on 9/11 about WTC-7 that. " may be the

smartest thing to do is pull it, " slang for demolish it.

 

-- It's difficult if not impossible for hydrocarbon fires like those

fed by jet fuel (kerosene) to raise the temperature of steel close to

melting.

 

Despite the numerous holes in the government story, the Bush

administration has brushed aside or basically ignored any and all

critics. Mainstream experts, speaking for the administration, offer a

theory essentially arguing that an airplane impact weakened each

structure and an intense fire thermally weakened structural

components, causing buckling failures while allowing the upper floors

to pancake onto the floors below.

 

One who supports the official account is Thomas Eager, professor of

materials engineering and engineering systems at MIT. He argues that

the collapse occurred by the extreme heat from the fires, causing the

loss of loading-bearing capacity on the structural frame.

 

Eagar points out the steel in the towers could have collapsed only if

heated to the point where it " lost 80 percent of its strength, " or

around 1,300 degrees Fahrenheit. Critics claim his theory is flawed

since the fires did not appear to be intense and widespread enough to

reach such high temperatures.

 

Other experts supporting the official story claim the impact of the

airplanes, not the heat, weakened the entire structural system of the

towers, but critics contend the beams on floors 94-98 did not appear

severely weakened, much less the entire structural system.

 

Further complicating the matter, hard evidence to fully substantiate

either theory since evidence is lacking due to FEMA's quick removal of

the structural steel before it could be analyzed. Even though the

criminal code requires that crime scene evidence be kept for forensic

analysis, FEMA had it destroyed or shipped overseas before a serious

investigation could take place.

 

And even more doubt is cast over why FEMA acted so swiftly since

coincidentally officials had arrived the day before the 9/11 attacks

at New York's Pier 29 to conduct a war game exercise, named " Tripod

II. "

 

Besides FEMA's quick removal of the debris, authorities considered the

steel quite valuable as New York City officials had every debris truck

tracked on GPS and even fired one truck driver who took an

unauthorized lunch break.

 

In a detailed analysis just released supporting the controlled

demolition theory, Reynolds presents a compelling case.

 

 

" First, no steel-framed skyscraper, even engulfed in flames hour after

hour, had ever collapsed before. Suddenly, three stunning collapses

occur within a few city blocks on the same day, two allegedly hit by

aircraft, the third not, " said Reynolds. " These extraordinary

collapses after short-duration minor fires made it all the more

important to preserve the evidence, mostly steel girders, to study

what had happened.

 

" On fire intensity, consider this benchmark: A 1991 FEMA report on

Philadelphia's Meridian Plaza fire said that the fire was so energetic

that 'beams and girders sagged and twisted, but despite this

extraordinary exposure, the columns continued to support their loads

without obvious damage.' Such an intense fire with consequent sagging

and twisting steel beams bears no resemblance to what we observed at

the WTC. "

 

After considering both sides of the 9/11 debate and after thoroughly

sifting through all the available material, Reynolds concludes the

government story regarding all four plane crashes on 9/11 remains

highly suspect.

 

" In fact, the government has failed to produce significant wreckage

from any of the four alleged airliners that fateful day. The familiar

photo of the Flight 93 crash site in Pennsylvania shows no fuselage,

engine or anything recognizable as a plane, just a smoking hole in the

ground, " said Reynolds. " Photographers reportedly were not allowed

near the hole. Neither the FBI nor the National Transportation Safety

Board have investigated or produced any report on the alleged airliner

crashes. "

 

For more informative articles, go to www.arcticbeacon.com.

 

Greg Szymanski

http://www.arcticbeacon.citymaker.com/articles/art

icle/1518131/27302.htm