Why I became a September 11 truther
September 12, 2011
by Hereward Fenton
On this sad anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in post-war history I am reminded of the prophetic words spoken by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in his farewell address to the nation in 1961: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”
Eisenhower was the supreme commander in western Europe who had led America to victory against one of the most evil regimes in history, a man who had witnessed the depths of human depravity, and wanted finally to warn us that the war machine which had been created to defend freedom in WWII could equally be used for the opposite purpose, and that it was up to the American people to guard against this possibility.
Eisenhower coined the phrase “military industrial complex” which became the catch-cry of the anti-war movement of the 1960s, describing an economic and political fusion of power involving armaments manufacturers, construction companies, banks, democratic governments and puppet dictatorships.
As Marine Major General Smedley Butler put it, War is a Racket. In his seminal book on the subject Butler declares, “I spent 33 years in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints.”
These and other observations about the racketeering, lying and theft that is the essence of war have informed many of us around the world who today call ourselves “9/11 truthers.”
The central argument of the movement is that 9/11 was a staged, false flag operation designed to propel the US and its allies into war for the sake of profit, oil and empire. False flags are defined in Wikipedia as “covert operations designed to deceive the public in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities.”
There are numerous examples in modern history where clandestine government agencies or rogue operatives have acted in this way, collaborating in the hatching of staged terrorist plots, the launching of self-inflicted military assaults to be blamed on the enemy, and in the formation of domestic terrorist organisations.
There is not enough space here to address these complex cases, but I encourage the reader to do an internet search on phrases like “false flag,” “strategy of tension,” “operation gladio,” “operation northwoods,” “attack on the Maine,” “Gulf of Tonkin incident,” “reichstag fire,” and “the power of nightmares” to find historical precedents which have a chilling resemblance to the events and aftermath of 9/11.
Some readers may be indignant at the suggestion that a modern democracy would permit its military arm to sacrifice innocent citizens for the sake of a political, economic or military imperative. If you are one of those people then I’m sorry but you have some hard lessons to learn. Use the search terms above and you will discover that I am not lying . You will find this information confirmed by many scholarly sources, and in some cases by impeccably researched BBC documentaries.
So far I have been trying to illustrate the context and precedents for looking at 9/11 as a false flag attack, but let’s now take a look at the specific evidence we have about 9/11, and let’s agree on what we can agree on:
– Planes were flown into the twin towers.
– Towers 1, 2 and 7 collapsed, symmetrically, at close to free fall, pulverising most of the concrete of those buildings into a fine dust which covered Manhattan.
– The Pentagon was hit by a third plane.
– A fourth plane crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
– Around 3,000 people died as a direct result of the attacks.
We can all agree with the mainstream account up to this point. Some have conjectured that the Pentagon may have been hit by something other than a Boeing 757, which is reasonable considering the US government’s refusal to release any video footage from dozens of security cameras, but this view is no longer widely held in the 9/11 truth movement.
It is when we consider the “why,” the “how” and the “who” of these events that I and many others radically depart from the mainstream narrative of 9/11.
I have already hinted at the answer to the “who” part. The evidence points to rogue networks within the military industrial complex and intelligence agencies who were using co-opted Islamic extremists as patsies. This view is corroborated by documented evidence that a key planner of the 9/11 plot and trainer of the hijackers was simultaneously an informant for the FBI, and other evidence that the NSA had been closely monitoring the alleged hijackers prior to 911.
In regard to the “how” questions, the only topic I will address in this piece is the collapse of the towers. All three collapsed at close to free fall, including Building 7, which was not even hit by a plane. There are numerous testimonies from first responders who saw heard and felt explosions before the buildings went down.
The free fall rate of collapse is strong proof that explosives were used, and there is no alternative to this conclusion that is consistent with the laws of physics.
This is not just my opinion, it is also the opinion of close to 2,000 qualified architects and engineers. Steel framed buildings do not simply crumble into dust as a result of fire. In the entire history of modern construction, including exhaustive large scale tests on real steel-framed structures, there is no precedent for this type of event.
The exact details of how the demolitions were carried out have not been proven, but what is clear beyond all reasonable doubt is that they were not brought down simply as a consequence of plane impacts and fires.
Currently there is one, and only one, peer reviewed scientific paper which addresses the question of whether explosives were used to bring down the towers.
The researchers, using electron microscopy, found that a residue of a high tech incendiary, nano-thermite, was present in all the dust samples retrieved from New York on 9/11. They also found iron micro-spheres in the dust, an indicator of intense heat way beyond that attained by office fires.
If you are curious to know more about the collapse of the towers, please visit Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth and the Remember Building 7 campaign.
Let’s now return to the “why” of it all, which is the most controversial question of all. Apart from the conquests and theft of resources in the middle east, at home we have been incrementally losing our freedoms too. In Australia, the government has given itself the power to detain suspects without charge, wiretap without warrants, secretly search people’s homes and blast travelers with radiation at airports.
The secret detention laws are so extreme that even telling someone that you were detained is a federal offence. Those subject to these measures have no right to silence and can only use a legal counsel approved by the government. People can be put under “control orders,” a form of house arrest, even though they have committed no crime. Non-suspects can be detained by force for interrogation, and we have sedition laws which can imprison people merely for their speech rather than for their actions.
According to a recent ABC law report there have been 54 new anti-terror laws passed since 9/11 and 37 prosecutions under these new laws — they are not merely for show.
People have been convicted and given harsh sentences merely for thinking about terrorist attacks. These anti-terror laws were designed to intervene in a “predictive way,” which calls to mind science fiction dystopias like Minority Report. Although the changes have been happening incrementally, the effects are very real and the trend is away from democracy, toward a type of society which can only be called totalitarian.
In short, there has been a power grab, using the fear of terrorism as its justification, and I would argue that this was the plan all along. The power structure which has asserted itself, often described as a “New World Order,” is global in scope, and treats national sovereignty with contempt. It is therefore crucial that upstanding citizens begin to realise the danger we are in and take action to reclaim our national sovereignty and reverse these trends.
Ultimately, 9/11 truthers are average people who are willing to stand up and say that two plus two makes four and who will not be bamboozled by the corporate media or intimidated by Big Brother. Evil triumphs because good people do nothing.
We are trying to do something. Future generations will remember us.
Learn more at truthnews.com.au.