Major 9/11 Breakthrough in Japan Spectacular Support for Yukihisa Fujita

Yukihisa Fujita, a member of the Upper House of the Japanese Parliament has recently published a book titled:
“Questioning 9/11 in Japan’s Parliament – Can Obama Change the USA?”

Co-authors of book are David Ray Griffin, Yumi Kikuchi, Akira Dojimaru.

Councilor Fujita is a current member and former director of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense. In this function he questioned 9/11 three times in parliament. Fujita claims that 9/11 as the main reason for the “War on Terror” needs to be newly investigated in order to find peaceful solutions.

On April 8 there was a formal reception on the ocassion of the publishing Mr. Fujita’s book
at the Tokyo Dome Hotel.

The event was organized and promoted by a large group of Mr. Fujita’s supporters including the chief editor daily newspaper Japan Times, several leading representatives of the Democratic Party and several business excecutives. They hosted the event in honour of the Mr. Fujita.
Yumi Kikuchi, a well known peace and 9/11 activists first presented a video lecture that had been prepared by co-author of the book, Akira Dojimaru, who lives in Spain and was not present at the event. The presentation explained in great detail the numerous main points that completely contradict the official 9/11 account of the US administration and the mainstream media. Its was made clear that 9/11 is used to constantly justify wars.

Takao Iwami, a political commentator who writes a column in the Mainichi Shimbun newspaper then questioned Mr. Fujita about the book, the consequences of 9/11 and perspective of the world politics.

During he second part of the event formal greetings to Mr. Fujita were presented by the following speakers:

Tadashi Inuzuka, Member of Parliament, member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence LINK
Hideaki Seo, director of Sundai School , chair of the Fujita Politics Forum
Yukiyo Hatoyama, general secretary of the Democratic Party of Japan LINK
Kazuo Tanigawa, former self defense minister and Justice minister for the ruling party in Japan,
Minshuto or Liberal Democratic Party
Yasushi Kurokouchi, fomer ambassador to Switzerland, Nigeria and Tanzania
Haruhiko Shiratori, father of a 9/11 victim.
Yasuo Onuki, former chief of the NHK office in Europe and the US. NHK, Japan Broadcasting Corporation, is Japan’s national public broadcasting organization.
Hiroshi Yamada, former chief editor of the US and Europe office of Japan’s daily newspaper “Yomiuri”
Kyoji Takei, representative of a major japanese printing labor union.

All speakers fully supported Mr. Fujita’s efforts emphasizing the importance of the 9/11 questions in the context of the need of peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan and the protection of Japan non-military constitution.

Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution prohibits any act of war by the state. Japan formally renounced war as a sovereign right and banned the settlement of international disputes through the use of force. The article No.9 also states that, to accomplish these aims, armed forces with war potential will not be maintained. Conservative forces are calling for a review of the article No.9 to allow Japan to take a larger role in global security using 9/11 as a central justification for these ever strong calls.

At end of the event a formal greeting adress by opposition and DPJ party leader Ichiro Ozawa was read to the audience in which Ozawa called for Mr Fujita to be persistent in his efforts.

Read the rest of this story here.

Images and Words
by Reprehensor

Anthony Hall is like many other 9/11 skeptics. At some point, after examining the events of 9/11 and the international consequences of that foul deed, (particularly the consequences that befell countries with a predominantly Arab/Muslim population), Mr. Hall decided to speak out. The difference between Hall and most 9/11 skeptics, is that Mr. Hall is a sitting academic at a university in Lethbridge, Alberta, in Canada.

Hall joined a growing list of Canadian academics who have chosen to speak out publicly; John McMurtry, Graeme MacQueen, Michael Keefer, and of course, Michel Chossudovsky, a pioneer in 9/11 skepticism.

He made his debut as a skeptic of the 9/11 Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) on September 6, 2008 in Edmonton, Alberta, with a reading of his paper, The Lies and Crimes of 911. The paper is an excellent introduction to a series of complex, related studies, that encompass globalization, US imperial tendencies, and false-flag terrorism. Hall is well-versed in these issues, and won an Alberta Book Award for his volume, The American Empire and the Fourth World;

The cover features provocative imagery; Apache-like helicopters in place of stars on the American flag, giving no doubt as to Hall’s intent. The image is a very un-subtle, ironic reinterpretation of one of the prime symbols of the American dream; the very banner of Liberty itself is subverted to shock the viewer into a reevaluation of the iconic Red, White and Blue. Just as effectively, the book’s publisher could have used an eagle… while once the American eagle flew with arrows in one taloned claw, and an olive branch in the other, increasingly, the olive branch has been discarded for the “smart” bomb, especially under the last eight years of Bush rule.

So, if Hall’s critics had a beef with him, his conscious decision to be weighed down so heavily with such an intentionally provocative design like the radically redesigned American flag would be fair game. It would be a slippery slope for the critics in light of the never-ending wave of revelations concerning torture, and the body count in Iraq, but I’m sure some idiot would step up for a public flogging, all the same.

When in Doubt, Play the Anti-Semitism Card!

Shortly after the web publication of Hall’s “Lies and Crimes” speech, it was picked up by a number of websites, including the “Facts not Fairies” blogspot, which Hall publicly distanced himself from, after reading some of the content on the site. (That particular blogspot also promotes the film “9/11 Missing Links”, a Trojan horse documentary laden with misinformation, disinformation, and racist rhetoric.) Hall very clearly segregated his message from those who use ethnicity as a base point for 9/11 investigation, and specifically, from those eager to scapegoat people of Jewish heritage, merely because of their ancestry.

A couple of weeks later, Hall on one hand criticized the Canadian Jewish Congress for their part in the firing of Canadian politician Lesley Hughes from the Liberal Party, and re-emphasized the importance of clarity, careful language, and avoiding the pitfalls of scapegoating entire ethnic groups through myths like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. In part, Hall said;

“There can be no honest escape for our civic duty to confront the substance of conspiracy and as well as layer upon layer of public mythology adhering to the real or imagined causes of 911. The stakes are immense in determining the outcome in this clash of conspiracy theories. Both extremes in this clash of conspiracy theories divert our attention away from rational debate on the events that have plunged the world into the weird nether zone of privatized espionage, torture and militarization that goes by the name of the War on Terror. What are the economics of this conflict? To extend basic questions presently being pressed on politicians during this period of worsening financial crisis, who is reaping the economic rewards of the new terror economy and who is being asked to pay the price? These are the kinds of questions that do not get posed, much less addressed, as long as public perceptions of the meaning of 911 are confined within the framework of competing conspiracy theories emphasizing religion and ethnicity.”

However, despite all of these caveats, yellow-journalist smear-blog, “The Black Rod” coughed up a hit-piece on Hall, in reprisal for Hall’s defense of Lesley Hughes. This is the same blog that initiated and inspired the series of attacks on Lesley Hughes that led to her sacking.

“The Black Rod” displays a knee-jerk reaction to any notion that there was any Israeli foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, let alone the possibility that Israeli intelligence assets played any sort of operational role on 9/11, writing, “Those sneaky Jews with their advance knowledge of everything is an integral part of the 911 Truth movement.”

Please note: it is “The Black Rod” which injects this venomous rhetoric into the equation, not Anthony Hall, and not 911blogger.com. By immediately reaching for the emotional reaction that a charge of bigotry will inspire in his/her readers, “The Black Rod” reaches for what retired CIA man Michael Scheuer recently called, “The Excalibur of American politics,” at the Doha Debates episode, filmed at Georgetown University. He is referring to the accusation of bigotry, to stifle fair debate.

In this manner, “The Black Rod” fails anyone who reads the blog.

Read the rest of this article here.

Spanish AG: No torture probe of US officials
By PAUL HAVEN
Associated Press

MADRID (AP) — Spain’s attorney general has rejected opening an investigation into whether six Bush administration officials sanctioned torture against terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay, saying Thursday a U.S. courtroom would be the proper forum.

Candido Conde-Pumpido’s remarks severely dampen the chance of a case moving forward against the Americans, including former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Conde-Pumpido said such a trial would have turned Spain’s National Court “into a plaything” to be used for political ends.

“If there is a reason to file a complaint against these people, it should be done before local courts with jurisdiction, in other words in the United States,” he said in a breakfast meeting with journalists.

Spanish law gives its courts jurisdiction beyond national borders in cases of torture, war crimes and other heinous offenses, based on a doctrine known as universal justice, but the government has made clear it wants to rein in the process.

Last month, a group of human rights lawyers asked Judge Baltasar Garzon, famous for indicting ex-Chilean ruler Augusto Pinochet in 1998, to consider filing charges against the six Americans. Under Spanish law, the judge then asked prosecutors for a recommendation on whether to open a full-blown probe.

National Court prosecutors have not formally announced their decision, but Conde-Pumpido is the country’s top law-enforcement official and has the ultimate say. While an investigative judge like Garzon is not bound by the prosecutors’ recommendation, it would be highly unusual for a case to proceed without their support.

A senior court official told The Associated Press that a formal announcement would come Friday. He said prosecutors would stop short of an outright call for dismissal of the case, but would raise a series of legal objections that would make it impossible for it to proceed in its current form.

He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

Coming less than three months after the Bush administration left office, the case was the first of several international efforts to indict former administration officials. Human rights groups have also tried to bring suit against Bush officials in a German court.

In addition to Gonzales, the complaint named ex-Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith; former Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, David Addington; Justice Department officials John Yoo and Jay S. Bybee; and Pentagon lawyer William Haynes.

It alleged that the men — who have become known as “The Bush Six” — cleared the path for torture by claiming in advice and legal opinions that the president could ignore the Geneva Conventions, and by adopting an overly narrow definition of which interrogation techniques constituted torture.

But Conde-Pumpido rejected that argument, saying the case had no merit because the men did not themselves commit the alleged abuses.

“If one is dealing with a crime of mistreatment of prisoners of war, the complaint should go against those who physically carried it out,” Conde-Pumpido said.

Gonzalo Boye, one of the human rights lawyers who brought the case in Spain, said the decision by Conde-Pumpido was politically motivated and set a terrible course for Spanish justice.

“The attorney general speaks of the court being turned into a plaything. Well, I don’t think the attorney general’s office should be turned into a plaything for politicians,” Boye told AP. “It is a terrible precedent if those intellectually responsible for crimes can no longer be held accountable.”

The court official told AP that in addition to raising legal doubts, prosecutors will say that Garzon should be replaced by another judge who is already investigating whether secret CIA flights to or from Guantanamo entered Spanish airspace or landed at Spanish airports.

Such a move would make it difficult for Garzon to try to keep the case alive despite prosecutors’ objections, as he did in the Pinochet case.

Observers say the removal of Garzon would be another serious blow for the hopes of human rights lawyers, who saw him as being sympathetic to their cause.

Most of the American officials named in the case have remained silent since the allegations first surfaced in March. Feith, however, has called Spain’s claim of jurisdiction “a national insult with harmful implications.”

Former President George W. Bush has steadfastly denied the U.S. tortured anyone. The U.S. has acknowledged that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-described plotter of the Sept. 11 attacks, and a few other prisoners were waterboarded at secret CIA prisons before being taken to Guantanamo. But the Bush administration insisted that all interrogations were lawful.

Associated Press writer Jorge Sainz contributed to this report.

The Bush Six to Be Indicted
Spanish prosecutors will seek criminal charges against Alberto Gonzales and five high-ranking Bush administration officials for sanctioning torture at Guantánamo.
by Scott Horton
April 13, 2009
The Daily Beast

Spanish prosecutors have decided to press forward with a criminal investigation targeting former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and five top associates over their role in the torture of five Spanish citizens held at Guantánamo, several reliable sources close to the investigation have told The Daily Beast. Their decision is expected to be announced on Tuesday before the Spanish central criminal court, the Audencia Nacional, in Madrid. But the decision is likely to raise concerns with the human-rights community on other points: They will seek to have the case referred to a different judge.

The six defendants—in addition to Gonzales, Federal Appeals Court Judge and former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, University of California law professor and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, former Defense Department general counsel and current Chevron lawyer William J. Haynes II, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff David Addington, and former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith—are accused of having given the green light to the torture and mistreatment of prisoners held in U.S. detention in “the war on terror.” The case arises in the context of a pending proceeding before the court involving terrorism charges against five Spaniards formerly held at Guantánamo. A group of human-rights lawyers originally filed a criminal complaint asking the court to look at the possibility of charges against the six American lawyers. Baltasar Garzón Real, the investigating judge, accepted the complaint and referred it to Spanish prosecutors for a view as to whether they would accept the case and press it forward. “The evidence provided was more than sufficient to justify a more comprehensive investigation,” one of the lawyers associated with the prosecution stated.

Read the rest of this entry »

Transcript from Visibility 9-11;  A Basic Chemistry Lesson with Dr. Niels Harrit
As recorded on Visibility 9-11 with Michael Wolsey, April 8, 2009
Full interview with notes found here.

Transcript:
Niels H. Harrit on Visibility 9-11
April 10, 2009

Beginning at 17:10 -

Michael Wolsey: Now, I took many classes in college and one of my science requirements that I had to take was indeed an introductory chemistry class, so I am not a complete idiot when it comes to chemistry, but I know that many of the listeners out there may never have taken a college class in chemistry so I thought it might be helpful to…maybe you could give folks a little bit of basic chemistry lesson and lets maybe take a well known chemical reaction that folks can relate to and maybe explain that.

Dr. Niels H. Harrit: The key word is nano thermite. I would split that in two and take the thermite first. Combustion; the campfire burning…because what is happening in the thermite is basically the same thing as when the campfire is burning. Heat is developed and the carbon in the wood is reacting with the oxygen of the atmosphere, and it is basically the same reaction going on in thermite. Wood burning is something that everyone is related to. Ya know wood is basically is carbon, it’s like coal burning. And when coal or gasoline or wood is burning it is reacting with the oxygen of the atmosphere and the reaction develops heat. So there are two to party; there are two ingredients in the reaction and in this case there is the coal and the oxygen and when they react they develop heat. And the reaction means electrons are being moved basically that what it is. Chemistry is the transformation of matter; of stuff. It is basically the same reaction going on in the thermite, except the role played by the oxygen, is now played by rust. And the role played by coal is now played by aluminum. So it’s the same kind of reaction as ordinary combustion it’s just that there are two other actors on the scene. And these actors now comes as tiny particles. When I say tiny, it’s a relative matter because in the classical thermite, you have pulverized rust and you have pulverized aluminum but still the grains are large enough for you to see by eye. This is like what you call flour and sugar. When you make a classical thermite, and this is an old invention from 1893 made by a German chemist called Goldschmidt and he discovered when he mixed finely divided rust with finely divided aluminum and got the reaction going, which is not that easy, I can tell you that, I have done it myself, but once the reaction is going it develops a tremendous heat and this heat is much much bigger than when the campfire is burning because the actors are mixed on beforehand. In the campfire you have to renew the air, the oxygen for the wood or for the coal to burn. And if you, if it doesn’t get enough air it doesn’t burn very hot, but in the thermite, these two actors who are to react with each other are mixed on beforehand as two powders. But in the plain thermite, these powders are relatively course; we are from a millimeter down to 1/1000^th of a millimeter. Now in nano thermite the grains, the particles is much smaller which means that the two actors, the two who have to react with each other are much much more finely divided and they can interact much more intimately and much faster. So the energy developed as heat is now developed so fast that we are approaching what you might call an explosive. You can even make it an explosive by mixing in other stuff and that is the key of the nano. This is the way you make the particles and when you make the particles so small you have the opportunity to mix in other stuff and it is this other stuff that makes it an explosive because in order to be an explosive you have to develop gasses. An explosive is working because it reacts so fast, not because there are terribly much energy but it develops an enormous pressure so you kinda knock over, whether it’s a piece of concrete or it’s a steel beam, you knock it over by force. But the thermite can do both. It depends of the composition of the thermite. It can either develop heat or it can be designed to work as explosive. It can also be, what you call a rocket propellant, what you call rocket fuel like the boosters on the, what you call the Space Shuttle. This is nano thermite. So this is a third option for a version or category of nano thermite which develop a lot of gasses but pretty slowly for the boosters to raise the Space Shuttle into space. But if this reaction is very fast, you get a very high pressure and that is an explosive. So the nano thermite concept has the whole potential and those who are making new explosives for the American military, in their advertisements they call these materials for explosives, the call them smaller, cheaper, and nastier. This is the explosives of the future, this is the munitions of the future, there is no doubt about this.

Read the rest of this entry »

Following Bush lead, Obama moves to block challenge to wiretapping program
New administration wants case against NSA dismissed
source: Raw Story
by Joe Byrne

President Barack Obama invoked “state secrets” to prevent a court from reviewing the legality of the National Security Agency’s warantless wiretapping program, moving late Friday to have a lawsuit that challenged the program dismissed.

The move — which holds that information surrounding the massive eavesdropping program should be kept from the public because of its sensitivity — follows an earlier decision in March to block handover of documents relating to the Bush Administration’s decision to spy on a charity. The arguments also mirror the Bush Administration’s efforts to dismiss an earlier suit against AT&T.

The Friday brief involves a lawsuit filed by the civil liberties group Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is suing the NSA for the wiretapping program. The agency monitored the telephone calls and emails of thousands of people within the United States without a court’s approval in an effort to thwart terrorist attacks.

It also stands firmly behind the telecommunications giant AT&T. AT&T whistleblower Mark Klein revealed that the company allowed the agency to install network monitoring hardware to spy on American citizens.

The Director of National Intelligence, the Justice Department says, “has set forth a more than reasonable basis to conclude that harm to national security would result from the disclosure of whether the NSA has worked with any telecommunications carrier.” AT&T is specifically mentioned. Public reports have fingered AT&T, Verizon, MCI and Sprint as participating in the government’s eavesdropping efforts.

Read the rest of this entry »

Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say
by Elaine Jarvik
Deseret News
Monday, April 6, 2009

Tiny red and gray chips found in the dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center contain highly explosive materials — proof, according to a former BYU professor, that 9/11 is still a sinister mystery.

Physicist Steven E. Jones, who retired from Brigham Young University in 2006 after the school recoiled from the controversy surrounding his 9/11 theories, is one of nine authors on a paper published last week in the online, peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal. Also listed as authors are BYU physics professor Jeffrey Farrer and a professor of nanochemistry at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark.

For several years, Jones has theorized that pre-positioned explosives, not fires from jet fuel, caused the rapid, symmetrical collapse of the two World Trade Center buildings, plus the collapse of a third building, WTC-7.

The newest research, according to the journal authors, shows that dust from the collapsing towers contained a “nano-thermite” material that is highly explosive. Although the article draws no conclusions about the source and purpose of the explosives, Jones has previously supported a theory that the collapse of the WTC towers was part of a government conspiracy to ignore warnings about the 9/11 terrorists so that the attack would propel America to wage war against Afghanistan and Iraq.

The next step, Jones said in a phone interview on Monday, is for someone to investigate “who made the stuff and why it was there.”

A layer of dust lay over parts of Manhattan immediately following the collapse of the towers, and it was samples of this dust that Jones and fellow researchers requested in a 2006 paper, hoping to determine “the whole truth of the events of that day.” They eventually tested four samples they received from New Yorkers.

One sample was from a man who had swept up a handful of dust on the Brooklyn Bridge, where he was walking when the second tower fell. As the journal authors note, “It was, therefore, definitely not contaminated by the steel-cutting or clean-up operations at Ground Zero, which began later. Furthermore, it is not mixed with dust from WTC-7, which fell hours later.”

Another man collected dust in his apartment, about five blocks from the World Trade Center, on the morning of Sept. 12. There was a layer about an inch thick on a stack of folded laundry near an open window.

Red/gray chips, averaging in size between .2 and 3 mm, were found in all four dust samples. The chips were then analyzed using scanning electron microscopy and other high-tech tools.

The red layer of the chips, according to the researchers, contains a “highly energetic” form of thermite. While normal thermite (a mixture of finely granulated aluminum and an oxide of metal) can be incendiary, “super thermite” is explosive. He says there is no benign explanation for the thermite in the WTC dust.

Jones made headlines in 2005 when he argued that the rapid and symmetrical fall of the World Trade Center looked like the result of pre-positioned explosives. He argued that fires alone wouldn’t have been hot enough to crumble the buildings; and that even if struck by planes, the towers should have been strong enough to support the weight of the tops as they crumbled — unless they were leveled by explosives.

Essentially forced to retire, Jones says he is now paying for research out of his own pocket. He likens himself to Galileo and Newton, who stood by their consciences. “I would like to think I could stand up for the truth,” he says.

The dust study vindicates his earlier theories, Jones says, but he has mixed feelings about the implications. “As a young student said to me a while back: ‘It’s exciting from a scientific point of view, because things are now making sense. But I feel sad for my country.’?”

Original article here.

Scientists found an active high-quality ‘super-explosive’ in the dust collected after the attack on the World Trade Centre in 2001 and the finding is completely contradictory to the findings of the official investigation financed by the American administration with George W. Bush at the helm.

The Open Chemical Physics Journal published a peer reviewed study by retired professor Steven E. Jones, doctor Niels Harrit and other scientists who scientifically proved that traces of  “a highly engineered explosive” had been found in the rubble and dust collected after the falls of WTC 1, 2 and 7.

- We have discovered distinctive red/grey chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/grey chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) – says a summary of the study, the results of which American media reported on.

The scientists identified part of the red chips as remains of a high-quality material that was made with nanotechnology and whose characteristics reveal that it is active thermitic material that belongs to the category of thermites.

According to the study, the discovered “nanostructured super-thermite” is a combination of elemental aluminium and iron oxide. Thermite is known for its efficiency in “cutting” iron, and once the reaction starts, it can cut through iron like knife through butter. Its application is usual in the iron industry, the production of hand grenades and controlled demolitions. The chemical reaction caused by use of thermite is characterised by extremely high temperatures that are focused on a very small surface area for a short period of time.

‘I was on your side’

The American independent online website “The Raw Story” reveals that the international sales and distribution of super-thermite is strictly controlled and restricted.

According to the U.S. government, “The cost and production rate of super-thermite composites has limited the use of these materials in DoD applications”.

- This finding really goes beyond anything that has previously been shown. We had to use sophisticated tools to analyze the dust because this isn’t just a typical explosive, RDX or CD4 or something — this is a highly engineered material not readily available to just anyone – Steven E. Jones wrote in his media statement.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) which the U.S. government chose to probe the destruction of the buildings never used such technology.

Of the prominent scientists who took part in the study that revealed the material whose existence is denied by all official institutions of the United States, are Dr. Niels Harrit, a chemistry professor at the Copenhagen University. In the past 30 years, he published numerous studies in journals such as the Nano Letters, the Journal of the American Chemical Society and the Journal of Physical Chemistry.

Along with the publishing of the study, Harrit offered answers to frequent reporters’ questions about why he dedicated his career to investigating the events of 9/11.

- First, I am opposed to crime, and second, when my 6 grandchildren ask me, ‘Grandfather, which side were you on?’ I will be able to answer them, ‘I was on your side’.

Original article here.

Visibility 9-11 continues our Special Report on the new research paper titled Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe and features an interview with Danish chemist Dr. Niels H. Harrit.  Dr. Harrit is an associate professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark and is the author/or co-author of nearly 60 peer reviewed scientific papers.  Dr. Harrit has also served on numerous occasions as a peer reviewer/referee for scientific papers written by others.  My guest today is also a member of Scholars for 9-11 Truth and Justice and actively tours Denmark lecturing on his discoveries into the 9-11 cover-up.

Our talk today with Dr. Harrit features an in-depth discussion on a new paper which has been formally published and peer reviewed by The Open Chemical Physics Journal titled Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe.  In this revolutionary new research paper, discoveries made in the World Trade Center Dust, particularly the red/gray bi-layered chips, are examined in great detail and include evidence of the thermite fingerprint at every juncture.

The research paper ends with this sentence, which pulls no punches when it comes to what the authors believe these red/gray chips to be:

“Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”

Dr. Steven E. Jones, co-author of the paper writes:

“In short, the paper explodes the official story that âno evidenceâ exists for explosive/pyrotechnic materials in the WTC buildings.”  The red/gray chips are the “loaded gun” of  9-11.

Read this important paper directly at The Open Chemical Physics Journal website here.
Find links to the research paper, previous episodes of this special report, and watch for other planned interviews on this topic at our Visibility 9-11 Special Report, The Thermite Fingerprint; The Loaded Gun of 9-11.

Intermission music by Bob Dylan.
Ending music by Dan Tyler.

Direct download: visibility911_dr_harrit.mp3

Dear Listener-

I want to take this opportunity to thank all of my listeners and supporters.  Without you, none of what has become known as Visibility 9-11, would be possible. Thank you for spreading the truth about 9-11, for listening and appreciating the work that we do at Visibility 9-11, for the kind and supportive emails that you have shared, and for the financial support you have given to help make this program and the website the best it can be.

Read the rest of this entry »

Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say
by Elaine Jarvik
Deseret News

Tiny red and gray chips found in the dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center contain highly explosive materials — proof, according to a former BYU professor, that 9/11 is still a sinister mystery.

online casinoPhysicist Steven E. Jones, who retired from Brigham Young University in 2006 after the school recoiled from the controversy surrounding his 9/11 theories, is one of nine authors on a paper published last week in the online, peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal. Also listed as authors are BYU physics professor Jeffrey Farrer and a professor of nanochemistry at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark.

For several years, Jones has theorized that pre-positioned explosives, not fires from jet fuel, caused the rapid, symmetrical collapse of the two World Trade Center buildings, plus the collapse of a third building, WTC-7.

The newest research, according to the journal authors, shows that dust from the collapsing towers contained a “nano-thermite” material that is highly explosive. Although the article draws no conclusions about the source and purpose of the explosives, Jones has previously supported a theory that the collapse of the WTC towers was part of a government conspiracy to ignore warnings about the 9/11 terrorists so that the attack would propel America to wage war against Afghanistan and Iraq.

The next step, Jones said in a phone interview on Monday, is for someone to investigate “who made the stuff and why it was there.”

A layer of dust lay over parts of Manhattan immediately following the collapse of the towers, and it was samples of this dust that Jones and fellow researchers requested in a 2006 paper, hoping to determine “the whole truth of the events of that day.” They eventually tested four samples they received from New Yorkers.

One sample was from a man who had swept up a handful of dust on the Brooklyn Bridge, where he was walking when the second tower fell. As the journal authors note, “It was, therefore, definitely not contaminated by the steel-cutting or clean-up operations at Ground Zero, which began later. Furthermore, it is not mixed with dust from WTC-7, which fell hours later.”

Another man collected dust in his apartment, about five blocks from the World Trade Center, on the morning of Sept. 12. There was a layer about an inch thick on a stack of folded laundry near an open window.

Red/gray chips, averaging in size between .2 and 3 mm, were found in all four dust samples. The chips were then analyzed using scanning electron microscopy and other high-tech tools.

What you need to know about “Peer-review”
by Dr. Steven E. Jones
911blogger.com

(Extra back-up for the claims made have been added in the form of hyperlinks)…

Since the days of Sir Isaac Newton, Science has proceeded through the publication of peer-reviewed papers. Peer-review means a thorough reading, commentary and even challenge before publication by “peers”, that is, other PhD’s and professors. This paper was thoroughly peer-reviewed with several pages of tough comments that required of our team MONTHS of additional experiments and studies. It was the toughest peer-review I’ve ever had, including THREE papers for which I was first author in NATURE. (Please note that Prof. Harrit is first author on this paper.) We sought an established journal that would allow us a LONG paper (this paper is 25 pages long) with MANY COLOR IMAGES AND GRAPHS. Such a scientific journal is not easy to find. Page charges are common for scientific journals these days, and are typically paid by the University of the first or second author (as is the case with this paper) or by an external grant.

A peer-reviewed journal is also called a “refereed” journal. Peer-reviewers are almost always anonymous for scientific publications like this — that is standard in the scientific world. While authors commonly recommend potential peer-reviewers, editors choose the referees and usually pick at least one or two reviewers that the authors did NOT mention — and that is almost certainly the case with this paper (based on commentary we received from the reviewers). In the end, all the reviewers — who were selected by the editor(s) — approved publication. Thus, the paper was subjected to peer review by the editor or editors, and it passed the peer-review process.

Debunkers may raise all sorts of objections on forums, such as “Oh, it’s just paint” or “the aluminum is bound up in kaolin.” We have answered those questions in the paper, and shown them to be nonsense, but you have to read to find the answers. I may also provide answers here and in emails, often quoting from the paper to show that the answers are already in it.

Here’s what you need to know (especially if you are not a scientist): UNLESS AN OBJECTOR ACTUALLY PUBLISHES HIS OR HER OBJECTION IN A PEER-REVIEWED ESTABLISHED JOURNAL (yes that would include Bentham Scientific journals), THEN THE OBJECTION IS NOT CONSIDERED SERIOUS IN THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY. YOU SHOULD NOT WORRY ABOUT NON-PUBLISHED OBJECTIONS EITHER.

So how do you, as a non-scientist, discern whether the arguments are valid or not? You should first ask, “is the objection PUBLISHED in an ESTABLISHED PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL?” If not, you can and should say — “I will wait to see this formally published in a refereed scientific journal. Until then, the published peer-reviewed work by Harrit et al. stands. ”

BTW, there also has been no PUBLISHED REFEREED paper yet that counters either the “Fourteen Points” paper or the “Environmental Anomalies” papers we published last year.

IF it is so easy to publish in Bentham Scientific journals, or if these are “vanity publications” (note: there is no factual basis for these charges) — then why don’t the objectors write up their objections and get them peer-reviewed and published?? The fact is, it is not easy, as serious objectors will find out.

Our results have passed the gauntlet of peer-review (including in this case, review at BYU consistent with the fact that there are two authors from BYU).

We say that this paper has the “imprimatur of peer-review”. That is a significant breakthrough. You cannot say that of big-foot or Elvis sightings… We are now in a different world from such things, the world of the published scientific community. CAN YOU APPRECIATE THE DIFFERENCE? I hope so. And this is what has our opponents so worried IMO…

Editors Note:  Below is the new version of this article, revised at The Raw Story for “balance and clarity’.  You can see the article in its original form here.

Study: ‘highly engineered explosive’ found in WTC rubble

by Stephen C. Webster
April 4, 2009
The Raw Story

A team of scientists claim to have unearthed startling data from dust and debris gathered in the days and weeks after the World Trade Center towers collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001.

In a study published by the Open Chemical Physics Journal — a peer-reviewed, scientific publication — Steven E. Jones and Niels Harrit level an stark allegation: that within the dust and rubble of the World Trade Center towers lays evidence of “a highly engineered explosive,” contrary to all federal studies of the collapses.

“We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center,” reads the paper’s abstract. “One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC).”

They claim their analysis has uncovered “active thermitic material”: a combination of elemental aluminum and iron oxide in form of thermite known as “nanostructured super-thermite.”

Thermite, used in steel welding, fireworks shows, hand grenades and demolition, can produce a chemical reaction known for extremely high temperatures focused in a very small area for a short period of time.

According to the Navy’s Small Business Innovation Research, super-thermite “is restricted under the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR), which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services.”

“This finding really goes beyond anything that has previously been shown,” said Jones in a media advisory. “We had to use sophisticated tools to analyze the dust because this isn’t just a typical explosive, RDX or CD4 or something — this is a highly engineered material not readily available to just anyone.”

“The cost and production rate of super-thermite composites has limited the use of these materials in DoD applications,” claims the Navy’s SBIR.

Dr. Steven E. Jones, a former physicist at Brigham Young University and a founding member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, presented a paper in 2005 discussing alternatives to the government’s theory that massive structural damage combined with burning jet fuel to weaken the towers’ support infrastructure, causing a rapid “pancake” collapse.

In September 2006, under heavy criticism in the media and several colleagues, the university placed Jones on paid administrative leave and his paper was removed from the BYU database.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, which investigated the WTC tower collapses, maintains there was no recovered evidence of explosive materials. An electronic FAQ to the government’s theory is available online.

“We get a lot of calls from people who have heard these theories,” NIST spokesman Michael Newman told Newsday. “But we conducted what was probably the most complex investigation of a building collapse in history.”

“We based our conclusion on the talents of the world’s best engineers and scientists, state of the art computer models and 236 pieces of steel recovered from the site,” reads the NIST FAQ.

“The collapse of the WTC towers was not caused either by a conventional building fire or even solely by the concurrent multi-floor fires that day,” NIST says. “Instead, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large, jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires weakened the now susceptible structural steel.”

“No building in the United States has ever been subjected to the massive structural damage and concurrent multi-floor fires that the towers experienced on Sept. 11, 2001,” the agency claims.

This latest report, Jones told Visibility 9/11, “explodes the official story that ‘no evidence’ exists for explosive/pyrotechnic materials in the WTC buildings. The red/gray chips are the ‘loaded gun’ of 9-11.”

Joe Byrne contributed to this report.

The Raw Story Editor’s note: This story has been updated and rewritten for balance and clarity.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Victoria Ashley, STJ911 committee member
Phone: 510-769-5109
Site: www.STJ911.org
Email: stj911@gmail.com

Study: Scientists Discover Active Thermitic Material in WTC Dust

Berkeley, CA, April 3, 2009 — A new study by independent scientists and researchers suggests the cause behind the catastrophic destruction of World Trade Center Towers on September 11th can be seen in the dust itself: active thermitic material, a highly engineered explosive.

The study, published today in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, describes a finding of “red/gray bi-layered chips” in samples of dust taken from vicinity of the World Trade Center following its destruction. Using tools such as a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and x-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS) to analyze the material, the study authors concluded that, “the red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.”

The study’s finding lends new support to the demolition theory put forth by critics of the official reports.

At a time when the American public is finding it difficult to understand the full story behind the current economic crisis, findings of a demolition raise new questions about how the ‘War on Terror’ — an enormous source of recent American spending — was started.

Officials with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), charged with establishing the cause of the buildings’ destruction, have stated that they “did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel,” and that thermite, “or another incendiary compound,” would be too difficult to have placed in the buildings without notice.

NIST has stated that such difficulties make demolition unlikely. They concluded that aircraft impacts and the subsequent fires led to the building failures.

Dr. Steven Jones, physicist and author on the paper, says that NIST has refused to test the dust for thermite, super-thermite, or any other accelerant or explosive.

“We’ve repeatedly asked them to follow standard investigative procedure, to perform these tests and release the results. They haven’t.”

Jones says such tests may be required by fire protection codes.

Kevin Ryan, chemist and co-author on the paper, explained why he thinks NIST is wrong. “What we’ve discovered is not conventional thermite — which is what NIST continues to refer to — but a highly engineered thermitic material, or ‘super thermite’, probably designed for just this type of application.”

Pre-planned demolition, supporters say, is the ‘best-fit’ model for the many unusual and unexplained characteristics of the building failures, such as the speed and symmetry of the collapses, and the extreme pulverization of the materials leading to clouds of micron-sized dust particles, described in one insurance report as behaving similar to a “volcanic eruption”.

“One of the unusual features that piqued my interest,” Jones said, “was the pools of molten metal seen in all three rubble piles, WTC 1, 2 & 7.”

NIST officials have published a response stating that the condition of the steel was “irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse.”

Jones, formerly a Professor of Physics with Brigham Young University and known for his work in muon-catalyzed fusion, published in Nature, Scientific American, and the Journal of Physical Chemistry, began researching the 9/11/01 attacks in 2005.

Jones discovered the curious thermitic material in 2007, when he ran a magnet over a dust sample given to him by a Manhattan resident survivor of the attack, and found that some particles were attracted to the magnet.

“That was very odd to me,” he said.

Those particles turned out to be iron-rich microspheres, partially described in a 2001 USGS study of the dust.

But to fully analyze, describe and report on the thermitic material would take longer.

Jones was joined in that effort by several others including Dr. Niels Harrit, a chemistry professor with the University of Copenhagen for over 30 years and author of numerous research papers in journals such as Nano Letters, the Journal of the American Chemistry Society, and the Journal of Physical Chemistry A.

Harrit says that he is frequently asked why he researches the September 11th attack. and says has two answers.

“First, I am opposed to crime, and second, when my 6 grandchildren ask me, ‘Grandfather, which side were you on?’ I will be able to answer them, ‘I was on your side’.”

Co-author Dr. Jeffrey Farrer, a materials scientist and Director of the TEM (Transmition Electron Microscopy) laboratory at BYU, says he hopes the paper will “change the way the 9/11 truth movement is viewed by the mainstream public and media.”

And chemist and co-author Kevin Ryan, a former Underwriters Laboratories manager, challenged the NIST report in public statements in 2004, and was consequently fired.

“This finding really goes beyond anything that has previously been shown,” says Jones. “We had to use sophisticated tools to analyze the dust because this isn’t just a typical explosive, RDX or CD4 or something — this is a highly engineered material not readily available to just anyone.”

In a 2006 interview with Deseret News, Jones noted that commercial explosives must contain tag elements for traceability, but that no law requires tagging of advanced forms of thermitics.

In 2008, several of these authors published three articles challenging the official reports in US scientific journals, The Open Civil Engineering Journal, The Environmentalist, and The Journal of Engineering Mechanics Dozens of other papers making similar challenges have been published in the sister publication of the Scholars group, The Journal of 9/11 Studies

Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice is a non-partisan organization of over 700 independent researchers analyzing the September 11, 2001 attacks with a strong emphasis on the scientific method.

For information: http://www.stj911.com or
Contact: stj911@gmail.com
Phone: 510-769-5109
# # #