NOVANEWS
by Stephen Lendman
Consensus 9/11 seeks “best evidence” proof to dispel official story falsehoods. It’s founded on:
-
“The opinions of respected authorities, based on professional experience, descriptive studies, and reports of expert committees.
-
Physical data in the form of photographs, videotapes, court testimony, witness reports, and FOIA releases.
-
Direct rather than circumstantial evidence.”
Determining “best evidence” depends on “integrating individual professional expertise with the best available documentary and scientific evidence.”
Simplified Delphi methodology is followed. It’s often used “where published information is inadequate or non-existent.” As a result, experts use “best evidence” to determine truth.
9/11: The Seminal Event of Our Time
Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, US Marine Corps (ret.) calls 9/11 “the watershed event of our lives and the greatest test for our democracy in our lifetimes.”
Calling the official explanation “impossible,” he cited “evidence of government complicity in the lead-up to the event, the failure to respond during the event, and the astounding lack of any meaningful investigation afterwards, as well as the ignoring of” subsequent evidence perhaps causing “the end of the American experiment….(O)ur republic and our Constitution remain in the gravest danger.”
Evidence revealed contradicts the official 9/11 story. It spawned a nightmarish decade of wars, torture, military tribunals, extraordinary rendition, assault on democratic freedoms, millions of deaths, and incalculable human misery.
Official 9/11 claims “are contradicted by facts that have been validated by a scientific consensus process,” using “best” and other strong evidence.
For example, bin Laden was blamed for 9/11. However, FBI charges against him excluded it. In fact, then FBI investigative publicity head Rex Tomb said no hard evidence connected him to it. Moreover, the 9/11 Commission also produced none.
Another example involves blaming jet impacts, fuel, and resulting fires for bringing down the Twin Towers. In fact, jet fuel reaches maximum temperatures no greater than 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit. Steel begins melting only at 2,700 degrees or higher.
Yet official reports claimed otherwise. They also said three causes only downed the buildings – jet impacts, fires and gravity. However, best evidence disproves this and other official claims.
WTC 7′s collapse is especially important. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) initially blamed structural damage combined with jet fuel fire. Then its final report blamed fire alone.
However, no plane struck the building. In addition, “no steel-frame high-rise building” ever collapsed from fire. Moreover, if such an event was possible, gradual weakness would first occur.
Yet WTC 7 experienced “virtual free fall” straight down symmetrically into its own footprint with its “roofline remaining essentially horizontal.” Best evidence shows “all 82 of (its) support columns had been eliminated by the time” collapse began. Human meddling, not damage, was responsible.
Another key fact involves nanothermitic material evidence. It “can be tailored to behave as an incendiary (like ordinary thermite), or as an explosive….”
Four “independently collected” WTC dust samples found it. A multi-authored, peer-reviewed paper reported it. Although NIST performed no tests to determine the presence of incendiary materials, it claimed none were present.
Many other best evidence examples disprove official accounts. They entirely lack credibility.
Other Consensus Points ask the following:
-
Why wasn’t Bush “hustled away from the Florida School” for his safety?
-
How credible is the White House claim about why he remained under national emergency conditions?
-
Claiming no pre-9/11 insider put option trading when records show their existence.
-
The questionable initial official reason why the Pentagon attack wasn’t prevented.
-
The dubious one that followed.