Experts Conclusively Debunk the Official 9/11 Story

Purported evidence crumbles to dust upon critical analysis
Empowering Weak & Oppressed

Kevin Barrett

Rabi' al-Awwal 23, 1440 2018-12-01

Book Review

by Kevin Barrett (Book Review, Crescent International Vol. 47, No. 10, Rabi' al-Awwal, 1440)

9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation by David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth; Pub: Olive Branch Press, 2018, 308 pages. Price: $14.26 Pbk.

The 9/11 Commission blamed the September 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, DC on 19 young Muslims and Osama bin Laden. That official story changed the world. But it was not just false; it was egregiously fraudulent. Those of us who have bothered to study the 9/11 crime and cover-up find it difficult to believe that millions of people still accept the official account. Anyone who even entertains the possibility that the official story might be true should immediately get their hands on 9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation by David Ray Griffin and Elizabeth Woodworth.

9/11 Unmasked is the most succinct, inarguable, and up-to-date refutation of the US government and mainstream media’s position on 9/11. Though credited to two authors — David Ray Griffin, the world’s leading 9/11 scholar, and Elizabeth Woodworth, a science librarian — it is really a seven-years-in-the-making collaborative work of 23 experts from fields including physics, structural engineering, aeronautics, chemistry, law, and other fields. These experts examined a great deal of material involving potential challenges to the official account of 9/11. Using the “best evidence” consensus model used by medical researchers, they gradually narrowed their focus to the following issues: the destruction of the Twin Towers, the destruction of WTC-7, the attack on the Pentagon, the 9/11 flights, US military exercises on and before 9/11, incriminating behavior by US military and political leaders, Osama bin Laden and the alleged hijackers, phone calls from the 9/11 flights, and insider trading.

“We used a standard best evidence consensus model employed in science and medicine to examine official claims about the 9/11 attacks,” co-author Elizabeth Woodworth told me in a radio interview. “We have 51 chapters in the book, representing 51 consensus points, and each chapter examines an official claim. The official account includes statements from the White House, FBI, Pentagon, the 9/11 Commission Report, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).”

Woodworth argues that consensus methodology is the best way to launch an investigation of an unsolved major political crime, “Consensus is a rigorous discipline in medicine and science. In medicine these statements are made by experts in, say diabetes or infectious disease control, this is how they bring experts in to judge a new approach. In medicine, the consensus statement model carries so much weight that medical consensus statements are often reported in the news. And malpractice suits may result if they are not followed. This is the first time it’s been done in relation to the official claims about 9/11, the first time they’ve been subjected to this very rigorous scrutiny.”

So how does it work? “Each consensus point received three rounds of review and feedback, during which the panelists were not allowed to talk to each other. So David Griffin and I would send out an initial statement, as they do in medicine when they’re developing consensus statements, to these 23 people. They would each review it, blind to one another, and send their feedback. Then we would incorporate that feedback and return it to the panelist. And we would do this three times; we would refine the point three times, until it reached 85% consensus, at which point it qualified to be listed on our website and in the book.”

The result of this painstaking seven-year process is the explosive demolition of virtually every aspect of the official story. The notion that Bin Laden was behind 9/11 — an evidence-free assertion repeatedly chanted by a chorus of talking heads within minutes of the attacks, but quietly abandoned a few months later by top US and UK officials — was subsequently debunked by the FBI, whose official position is that there is “no hard evidence” of Bin Laden’s involvement (this might explain why Bin’s Laden’s alleged library in his compound in Abbottabad included books by such 9/11 skeptics as David Ray Griffin; apparently the purported “9/11 mastermind” did not know who was behind 9/11 but strongly suspected an inside job, as his statements to the media in September and early October 2001 attest).

The claim that a devout Muslim named Muhammad ‘Ata led a team of 19 Arab hijackers is equally fraudulent; as Griffin and Woodworth show, the “‘Ata” who came to the US and was blamed for 9/11 is almost certainly not the same Muhammad Muhammad al-Amir ‘Awad al-Sayyid ‘Ata who studied urban planning in Hamburg, Germany in the 1990s and was apparently victimized by identity theft. As for the other 18 “Arab hijackers” (including many identity theft perpetrators like “‘Ata”) none appear to have been practicing Muslims, nor were any of them on the alleged attack planes. The purported evidence of “hijackings” including demonstrably fake “cell phone calls” crumbles to dust upon critical inspection.

And speaking of dust: what ten-second process transformed the 110-story World Trade Center Towers into vast pyroclastic clouds of sub-100-micron particles with the texture and consistency of talcum powder? What explosive force could have hurled 100-ton steel frame members upward and outward, melting and even vaporizing steel, leaving “rivers of molten iron” flowing in the rubble for months after the attack? (all experts admit that jet-fuel-kindled office fires cannot melt steel, much less evaporate it). And what could have annihilated all traces of more than 1,000 people inside the World Trade Center, leaving not even a bone sliver or a fingernail to be found by the meticulous sifters-and-bucketers, while scattering tiny bone shards all over the roofs of buildings hundreds of feet away?

9/11 Unmasked efficiently dismantles the many contradictory official stories of what happened to the World Trade Center: the 2002 FEMA Report, the absurd 2004 9/11 Commission Report claim that the Towers cores were “hollow” allowing a “pancake collapse,” the 2005 NIST report on the Towers, and finally the long-delayed 2007 NIST report on World Trade Center Building 7. All of these risible and mutually-inconsistent reports, the book and its sources show, constitute blatant, virtually undisguised scientific fraud.

Cearly 9/11 was a false flag event — a neoconservative “policy coup” designed to “take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran” in the words of whistleblowing General Wesley Clark. But who was behind it?

Part 6 of 9/11 Unmasked examines eight American military and political leaders with central roles on 9/11: Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Acting Joint Chiefs Chair Richard Myers, nominal Joint Chiefs Chair Hugh Shelton, NMCC Commander Gen. Montague Winfield, NORAD Commander Ralph Eberhart, and New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. Based on the wildly mutually inconsistent accounts and demonstrable lies offered by these men and their protectors concerning their potentially treasonous activities on September 11th, 2001, all eight of them ought to be immediately arrested and hauled into the nearest precinct station for interrogation.

Many leading 9/11 researchers, including Solving 9/11 author Christopher Bollyn and French historian Laurent Guyénot in From Yahweh to Zion, have presented evidence implicating Israeli officials and assets as likely prime orchestrators of the 9/11 “policy coup” aimed at “taking out” Israel’s enemies. Unfortunately, 9/11 Unmasked includes no mention of this topic. Why not?

I raised this question with Elizabeth Woodworth, “PNAC, the neocon (Zionist) think tank, had openly called for a New Pearl Harbor in Rebuilding America’s Defenses, issued one year ahead of 9/11… one interpretation is that 9/11 was basically done by Israel through Israeli assets in the US — maybe they were Team B in the war game and they took their role a little too seriously — and that these American leaders were in fact set up in such a way that it’s so obvious they were complicit. So they were opened up to (Israeli) blackmail to ensure the truth of 9/11 would never come out… which leads to my next question: is there any consensus about the fact that Israel was the only country that gained, and that there was some kind of Israeli participation in this? And if not, why not?”

Elizabeth Woodworth answered, “Well, it’s not a subject we would have looked at. Because the Consensus Panel’s mission has been to focus on the official claims made by the US government and its agencies. And these do not involve Israel. So as a representative of the Panel, I can only speak about the Panel’s evidence refuting the official claims. I can’t go beyond that. It’s a little bit like the way scientists try to stay pure to the evidence and don’t want to be involved in political discussions. We’ve also felt that we have enough evidence against the official claims without involving Israel, which would turn a lot of people against the Consensus Panel and the other evidence that they might accept. Because the whole Israel issue is such a controversial one in the Western world.”

It certainly speaks well of Americans’ ability to engage in self-criticism that accusing top US leaders of murdering 2,500 Americans in a single morning is less “political” and “controversial” than accusing Israeli leaders of complicity in the same crime. But this does not speak well for Americans’ freedom to speak their minds about a certain foreign power that dominates their politics and media and has repeatedly attacked their country with impunity (two well-known examples being the Lavon Affair and the USS Liberty massacre).

Obviously Muslims, the main victims of the 9/11 deception, ought to be working harder to expose the monumental fraud of 9/11. As the “Conclusion” to 9/11 Unmasked puts it, “The claim that al-Qaeda operatives, under the inspiration of Osama bin Laden, attacked America on 9/11 was used by the Bush-Cheney administration as a pretext to attack Muslim-majority nations… The belief that Muslims were responsible for the 9/11 attacks also led to a great increase in Islamophobia in the world, especially in the United States.”

According to avoidable mortality expert Dr. Gideon Polya, the real death toll of the 9/11 wars stands at 32 million Muslims and counting. To help end this ongoing holocaust, we should ensure that 9/11 Unmasked, whose inarguable evidence will convince any reader with basic critical thinking skills, reaches the widest possible audience.

Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Copyrights © 1436 AH
Sign In
 
Forgot Password?
 
Not a Member? Subscribe

Loading...