Tag Archives: explosives

Are we all hard-wired not to question 9/11 official story?


I’m not into conspiracy theories, except the ones that are true or involve dentists. – Michael Moore

November 11, 2010

By Craig McKee

The human brain is a fascinating thing. It controls everything we perceive. It is the vehicle through which all information passes, the filter through which all external events are processed. We can use it to search for the truth, but it can also stop us from looking.
We believe that any opinion we might have is based simply on our understanding of the facts. Sure we all have our biases, but we’re aware of them, right?
Not necessarily. We may be aware of the obvious ones, but the subtle ways we resist facts presented to us often slip under the radar. The things that motivate us to defend what we Continue reading →

Evidence points to bombs being detonated in the Pentagon on 9/11

November 9, 2010

By Craig McKee

A great deal has been written about the evidence for explosives in the World Trade Center, but not enough attention has been paid to the evidence that bombs were detonated in the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.
As I wrote in my Oct. 2, 2010 post, “How could Flight 77 have caused interior Pentagon damage on 9/11?”, there was a great deal more damage done to the interior of the Pentagon than a plane impact could account for – or any impact from the outside for that matter.
We know that the government’s conspiracy theory states that American Airlines Flight 77 penetrated the Pentagon at roughly a 45-degree angle and managed to go through three rings of the Pentagon, punching a round exit hole in the inside wall of the C Ring Continue reading →

‘Box cutter’ nuts and their wild theories: a gem of 9/11 satire


I came across this wickedly dry bit of conspiracy analysis from 2003 recently and really enjoyed it. Since the author offered it freely for reproduction (with credit given) I thought it would be worth including in this blog. Sadly, the author passed away from cancer earlier this year. He was just 51.
His piece goes to show that when the government and media offer an explanation of an event like 9/11, their story is never looked at as a theory. But it’s worth turning the tables occasionally – Craig McKee
November 7, 2010

Debunking conspiracy theorists: Paranoid fantasies about Sept. 11 distract from the real issues

By Gerard Holmgren (Copyright Gerard Holmgren, Jan. 9, 2003)

Astute observers of history are aware that for every notable event there will ususally be at least one ,often several wild conspiracy theories which spring up around it. “The CIA killed Hendrix” ” The Pope had John Lennon murdered “, “Hitler was half Werewolf”, “Space aliens replaced Nixon with a clone” etc,etc. The bigger the event, the more ridiculous and more numerous are the fanciful rantings which circulate in relation to it.
So it’s hardly surprising that the events of Sept 11 2001 have spawned their fair share of these ludicrous fairy tales. And as always, there is – sadly – a small but Continue reading →

More impossible 9/11 ‘eyewitness’ accounts: Renaud and McIntyre


November 5, 2010

By Craig McKee

One of the most bizarre and unbelievable accounts given by anyone with TV network connections on Sept. 11, 2001 was that of Theresa Renaud, described as the wife of CBS Early Show producer Jack Renaud.
Her account is available on the Internet and was presented in the film September Clues, which alleges that video we saw on and after Sept. 11 was tampered with to deceive the public.
Renaud was recounting live on CBS how she had been at her window and had heard the North Tower explosion. While telling the story, she sees the second alleged impact. Her account of that, live, was very revealing.
Before that second impact, she explained to host Bryant Gumbel that her office building in Chelsea looked “directly on to” the towers (even though it was several miles north). She described how her building was the tallest in the area, giving her a good view of the World Trade Center.
Renaud described the first impact this way: “I would say that approximately 10 minutes ago there was a major explosion from, probably it looks like from the 80th floor, it looks like it’s affected probably four to eight floors, major flames are coming out of the, let’s see, the north side and also the east side of the building, yes.”
Gumbel then asks her if she heard the explosion. She continues: “Oh yes, yes we did as a matter of fact, in fact we did hear because I was standing there pretty much standing looking out the window. I didn’t see what caused it or if there was an impact.” Continue reading →

Why did some media personalities lie about what they saw on 9/11?


November 3, 2010

By Craig McKee

One of the most disturbing aspects of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 is the strange and sometimes suspicious behavior of the media.
We have seen journalists who reversed their stories, stories that were reported on 9/11 but never after that, and huge questions that were never even asked by the media. And we have witnessed what can only be seen as intentional deception on the part of some media professionals or those connected to the media.
As the attacks were unfolding that morning, there was an apparent army of TV network executives and news staff who just happened to be near the World Trade Center or the Pentagon and were ready to report on what was going on within Continue reading →

The clearer we thought we saw 9/11, the easier we were to fool


October 31, 2010

By Craig McKee

You’d have to think it would be just about impossible to deceive the world about a catastrophic event like 9/11 because everything happened in broad daylight in front of thousands of people wouldn’t you?
But maybe it’s just the opposite. Maybe it’s the fact that thousands saw it in person and millions watched it over and over on TV that has made it so easy for us to be fooled. The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it, as Hitler said.
Most of us are desperate to believe what we’re told. We think that if we question everything we see and hear, then we’ll never know what’s real and what’s not. This fact is taken advantage of by Continue reading →

WTC cameras, locks, electricity turned off weekend before 9/11


October 26, 2010

By Craig McKee

Many of us can’t believe explosives were placed in the World Trade Center because it would be impossible to “sneak” them in with so many people watching.
This assumes a lot of things. First, it assumes that people are paying attention when “work” is going on in the Trade Center. Secondly, and more importantly, it assumes that even if people raise questions that someone is going to listen to them.
Scott Forbes, who was a senior database administrator for Fiduciary Trust, located on the 97th floor of the South Tower received a remarkable notice three weeks before the 9/11 attacks. The Port Authority of New York informed his company that there would be a “power down” on the weekend of Sept. 8 and 9, 2001. This would mean that all power would be off in the top half of the south tower for most of the weekend.
Forbes has called this unprecedented, because to have a data centre lose power for two days requires major preparations and disruption. He reports that as part of the power down, all security cameras and security door locks were non-operational for about 36 hours.
“Remember there were no security locks on doors or security cameras, so access was free unless Continue reading →

Molten metal under WTC rubble could NOT have come from jet fuel


October 24, 2010

By Craig McKee

When they can’t explain it, they do the next best thing.
They ignore it.
The U.S. government, the 9/11 Commission, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, FEMA and the mainstream media all do the same thing.  When they can’t explain something that contradicts the official version of events on 9/11, they simply pretend the questions don’t exist.
Among the most crucial examples of this are the large pools of molten metal found under the rubble of the two twin towers of the World Trade Center and Building 7. The molten metal burned under the rubble for weeks, with the final fires not being extinguished until December of 2001, three months after the disaster.
The official story can’t explain this; it doesn’t even try. That’s because the molten metal points to a controlled demolition – explosive charges combined with a material that causes a chemical Continue reading →

Talking to people about 9/11 is an exercise in frustration

Truth only reveals itself when we give up all preconceived ideas – Shoseki

October 5, 2010

By Craig McKee

Are you ever tempted to lose it because people don’t think exactly like you do?
Really? Never?
I get it, we’re civilized. We don’t behave that way. We celebrate the right of everyone to believe whatever they choose to. We respect everyone’s right to say what they want – and think what they want.
Well, if that’s true, why am I gritting my teeth as I write this? The truth is that sometimes all that polite “agree-to-disagree” crap makes me want to look into primal scream therapy.
As you can tell by the majority of articles posted on this blog over the past two months, I’m pretty interested in the subject of 9/11. No, not obsessed. Continue reading →

Building 7: the smoking gun of 9/11

Fires weren’t enough to bring down Building 7.

September 3, 2010

By Craig McKee

Shortly before 5 p.m. on Sept. 11, 2001, BBC World reporter Jane Standley told a TV audience that World Trade Center Building 7 had just collapsed, the third WTC building to fall that day as the result of supposed terrorist attacks.
The problem was that the 47-storey office tower was still clearly visible over her left shoulder during the entire live report. Roughly 23 minutes after this “mistake” the building actually did fall. How did the BBC know this would happen? Where did the premature report of the destruction of the building come from?
While the BBC has claimed that it was simply an error, they have made no effort to provide the public with the source of their information (Standley says she doesn’t remember what she said on camera). It is also interesting that Standley’s video feed broke up at around 5:14 p.m., sparing us the site of the Continue reading →