2nd July

I’ve added comments on the claim that “Barbara Olson said the Flight 77 pilots were sitting in the back of the plane with her”, and “the FBI contradicted Ted Olson’s account of being called by Barbara Olson on 9/11”. See points 2.5 and 2.6 on this page. Don’t set any permanent links here, though - I need to transplant the Olson call-related content elsewhere and get things organised a little better.

I’ve added the Moussaoui trial exhibit that displayed information on the passenger’s phone calls. You can find it as the “phone calls from the flights” link here, or directly launch the Flash file http://www.911myths.com/images/flash/flights/MainNew.swf . Be aware that this uses a number of big applets, up to 5 MB in size, so if you’re on a slow internet connection then you may have to wait quite some time before information appears. Be patient.

1st July

Someone emailed to ask me whether I knew that the Patriot Act had been written 8 months before it was introduced. I hadn’t heard that before, but a quick Google check showed there are a few people who believe this, apparently because of a 2006 Prison Planet piece. The “proof” is weak even by their standards, but it’s worth recording just as an example of how some folks will believe anything, so I added a quick page here.

7th June

I’ve uploaded another video of the second WTC impact. It’s on this page and labelled “Luc Courchesne”.

4th June

Every time I think I’ve cleared my work backlog, something else crops up. Right now I’ve two tasks and around 3,000 words to do for Monday, so that’s the weekend gone (again). After that I might squeeze in a day or two here, but there’s already another 6,000 words that have come in early so there won’t be much time.

Anyway, I did at least spot an interesting video where Fire Chief Richard Picciotto mentioned seeing WTC7 “engulfed in fire” when he finally escaped from the rubble. He’s said this in print already, but some people seem to value video clips more, so I’ve put it up here. If you’d like to hear the full interview then point your browser in this direction.

25th May

Ryan Mackey has delivered a major update to his “On Debunking 9/11 Debunking” paper, covering David Ray Griffin’s criticisms of NIST. The new version includes a detailed response to Jim Hoffman’s review, and you can download a copy here.

As for me, I’m back to real-life work tomorrow. It’s unlikely there will be any major updates here for at least a week, though I may add a few tweaks here and there when I have a moment.

22nd May

I’ve added some more witness videos to the Flight 77 page.

And I’ve fired five further FOIA applications to the New York FBI office (also re: issues raised by the recent hijackers timeline). I still think they’ll be rejected until after the upcoming trials of KSM and others, at least, but I have to give it a try.

21st May

I’ve spent a while updating the eyewitness accounts on the Flight 11 and Flight 175 evidence pages. I also decided to create a similar list for Flight 77. Considerably more work is required on that, but you have to start somewhere: view the page here.

16th May

Added a page on Randy Glass. Nothing of any great importance, although I was interested to see the first version of the story didn’t quite include the later “those towers are coming down” prediction.

15th May

I’ve mailed four FOIA requests off to the FBI, all related to various issues uncovered by the recent release of the FBI’s hijacker timeline. I suspect they may be rejected on the grounds of being in a file that’s a part of an ongoing investigation, but we’ll see what happens. 

I found a couple more Flight 93 crash times, 9:58 and 10:20.

Added a copy of the Arlington County after-action report to the site.

Added the following quote from that report to the Mineta page:

At about 10:15 a.m. on September 11, the WFO Command Center was notified by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that another airliner, United Airlines Flight #93, was hijacked after taking off from Newark, NJ, and was flying on a course from western Pennsylvania toward the Washington Metropolitan Area. The FAA estimated it would reach Washington, DC, in 20 minutes. The Command Center relayed the information to Special Agent Combs at the ACFD ICP who alerted Chief Schwartz. Special Agent Combs located a Washington Metropolitan Airports Authority (WMAA) firefighter equipped with a radio and confirmed the information about Flight #93. Chief Schwartz ordered a complete area evacuation, directing the response force to relative safety beneath nearby highway overpasses. Special Agent Combs stayed at Chief Schwartz’ side, giving him updates as the FAA tracked the course of Flight #93. The last update came when the airliner was 4 minutes away from the Pentagon. Five minutes later, Special Agent Combs reported to Chief Schwartz that Flight #93 had crashed into Camp David in Maryland. In fact, it crashed in a field near Shanksville, PA. Chief Schwartz sounded the all clear.

It’s further confirmation that the FAA were passing information on the projected course of Flight 93, long after it had crashed.

14th May

I’ve transferred and updated the “fatty bin Laden” video tape content onto the new site, and this page. It’s messier than I’d like but will have to do for now.

13th May

A writing job was brought forward, which meant I lost all my free time last week. The good news is that it’s completed now, though, and hopefully I’ll finally have some free time to get caught up on things this week.

To start with, a small page on a bin Laden tape from 2002 that was supposedly declared “95% certain it’s a fake”. Nothing too special, just one of those occasions when I noticed the headline doesn’t properly represent the real story. Read more here.

6th May

It’s time to update and transfer the so-called “fatty bin Laden” video copy, I think. I’ve made a start by uploading Flash versions of the original low-res clip, the Moussaoui trial clip, and the excellent “The Usual Suspects” segment on this issue to a new page.

In addition, the full version of The Usual Suspects is difficult to find now, so I’ve uploaded a backup copy here.

On another point, I’ve noticed that part of the evidence for a 10:06 crash time for Flight 93 comes from press reports. But what the people pushing this idea aren’t telling you is that the press have given a wide range of Flight 93 crash times. Just after the attacks there were a cluster that put it at around 10:40, for instance. And CNN gave times of 10:03 and 10:06 in separate reports on the same day in 2002. I’ll do something on that eventually, but in the meantime, I’ve listed a few crash times on this new stub page.

4th May

I’ve added some content on the “put options” story to the new site. It’s unfinished, but to be honest I just got bored, it really is quite lengthy and tedious. Still, there’s more content than in the previous version so it might be worth a look. Test your boredom threshold here.

In slightly better news, I should be able to devote the bulk of next week to catching up with site tasks. I’ll try to use the time to deliver a few more interesting updates.

18th April

I spotted an interesting piece of raw CNN footage, that appears to show the beginning of the White House evacuation occurring after the Pentagon was hit. It also shows the “mystery white plane” flying overhead afterwards (the E4B, presumably). I’ve not had time to edit it, so what you get is 9 minutes with very little happening, and even the Flash file is a chunky 35 MB: sorry! If you’re interested anyway, watch the Flash version here (it’s the middle video, labelled “Raw footage”), or ideally download the slightly higher quality WMV version from here.

17th April

I’m at least two features/ a week away from getting back to work here, but in the meantime, three new NORAD tapes have appeared. Find them here.

9th April

I’ve been busily working on updating and transferring a group of pages to the new site. Time has ran out, though: I need to get back to real-life work for at least a couple of weeks, so it won’t be finished until some time after that.

In the meantime, though, I’ve uncovered an interesting article from 2002. A Paul Deakin in the UK said he shared a house with Jarrah, once saw him fly into a building on a PC flight simulator, and recognises his voice on at least one of the final transmissions from Flight 93. Read it here.

3rd April

Some 9/11 theories make careful use of eyewitness testimony. They might choose to ignore or minimise reports of people who said they saw a passenger jet crash into the Pentagon, for instance, and pick a less common account that they can claim disproves the "official story". This is dangerous, though, because eyewitness accounts can be very unreliable, with people disagreeing completely on the most basic details. A New York Times article on witnesses to the crash of American Airlines Flight 587 explains more.

1st April

In an ideal world the comments defending yesterday’s Olmsted-related nonsense would be an early April fool... But the sad reality, I think, is they’re entirely genuine. Some people really will continue to believe, no matter what.

31st March

I found an interesting 1997 article on how the WTC security was being revamped, and have archived it here.

Meanwhile, wow, we’re back to this again:

Olmsted requested and received what was called an 'official flight manifest'. It differs from what pro-government sites are now calling "official manifest images" in that there were not then nor now Arab names on the list. Rather, the list Olmsted received from the government in response to his FOIA request, matches precisely what had been originally reported and is still reported by CNN. Therefore: the original and official flight manifests did not and do not include the name of a single Arab hijacker.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/opedne_len_hart_080329_a_lie_called_911_3a_wh.htm

Please, go read the whole story before you continue.

Then ask yourself: why does Mr Hart tell us that “Olmsted requested and received what was called an 'official flight manifest'”? Especially as he tells us above that “I undertook by FOIA request, to obtain that autopsy list of the people on Flight 77, which hit the Pentagon”.

Actually we’ve already pointed out what Mr Olmsted’s document represents:

The problems start with Olmsted's apparent assumption that his "autopsy list" is somehow equivalent to a passenger manifest, a complete list of everyone onboard. The cover letter Olmsted receives tells us exactly what it is: "the names of 58 victims of AA Flight 77 that were identified here at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology" (AFIP). That is all.

And of course once you read that sentence, it's also obvious that Olmsted's claim that "no Arabs wound up on the morgue slab" is also entirely unsupported. All the document tells us is that these are the people who were identified by the AFIP. It doesn't discuss people who were not identified, or might have been identified elsewhere.

By way of an example, 2-year-old Dana Falkenberg is also not included on Olmsted's list. Does this show she wasn’t on the plane? No, just that no identifiable remains were recovered. Therefore the list is demonstrably incomplete, even without the issue of the hijackers.
http://911myths.com/index.php/No_hijackers_on_the_passenger_manifests

Olmsted didn’t request or receive a manifest. Hart is misleading his readers. And that’s before we get on to the old “hijackers still alive” nonsense. It’s like it’s 2004 all over again...

25th March

I’ve spent the last few days working on more general tweaks, adding links, cleaning things up. Noticeable changes include the addition of a few news pictures, of Bush at the Florida high school and Cheney at the PEOC, as well as a quick note on the “Benazir Bhutto said bin Laden was murdered by Omar Sheikh” story.

I noticed that David Ray Griffin is claiming a BBC documentary, Clear the Skies, supports Mineta’s account. And it does, at least in the sense that it allows him to retell his “50 miles out “story. However, the programme also says Cheney wasn’t evacuated until after 9:33 and so couldn’t have been in the PEOC at 9:20, as Mineta said. So I’ve updated the Mineta page to mention this, and added the transcript of the complete programme to the site.

22nd March

The site has seen various tweaks over the last few days, nothing major, just tiny improvements here and there.

I’ve added a few stub pages, for instance. Most have nothing on them yet (like the one for David Ray Griffin), but will be fleshed out eventually. 

I’ve added plenty of redirect pages, too. You don’t have to type “American Airlines Flight 77” in the search box to reach that particular page any more: “Flight 77” or just “77” will now work as well (less the quotes). It’s the same for the other flights and various people (Mineta, Cheney etc), although some only lead to stub pages and there are plenty more left to do.

I’ve improved the “Mom, this is Mark Bingham” telephone call page by adding a Flash video of his mother’s comments.

And there are a few minor new pages, too, on Robert Baer, and one showing the NTSB video of American Airlines Flight 587, a useful reminder that even the best security camera footage of an incident can sometimes be very bad indeed.

17th March

A heavy workload & a minor illness have kept me away from here until now, but I’ll be back as of tomorrow. Housekeeping tasks first, as I said previously, then more substantial work after a week or two.

18th February

I spent too much time trying to get the Clarke, Cheney and Mineta pieces finished, which means deadlines for my real-life work are piling up. I’ve been tied up all day, and that situation will continue for at least two weeks. There will be no updates at all here for some time, then, and when I do get back I’ll be concentrating on housekeeping for a while, tidying pages up. So if you regularly check this page, then I’d give it a miss until mid-March. 

Long-term, the hijacker timetable below highlights some interesting FOIA possibilities. Whether they’ll be available with upcoming 9/11 trials, I don’t know, but it has to be worth a try.

15th February

I've thought about covering Mineta on 911myths before, but always decided against. It such an important story that I felt I had to cover it definitively, come up with something solid and new to prove my point. I've put in a couple of FOIA applications that might do just that, but nothing has come back yet.

To be honest, it's also seemed like an intimidating amount of work. People use Richard Clarke's timeline to support Mineta, bring in the "when did Cheney arrive at the PEOC?" line as well, and there's just a lot to do.

A couple of weeks ago, though, I wondered: if I were to do something on these issues now, without my FOIA documents, what would it look like? So I started work, and was surprised by just how many issues I discovered. That’s the “next big thing” I’ve been talking about, and now you can check them out, too.

The Richard Clarke teleconference

Dick Cheney at the PEOC

Norman Mineta

The other big headline of the day: the Hijackers Timeline is now online.

For a basic, image-based scan of the documents (12.1 MB PDF), go here.

For an OCRed version that helps you search it (though there are many errors, and this won’t be reliable - 27.3 MB, PDF) go here.

13th February

A big, heavy Fed-Ex package just arrived. I wasn't expecting anything, and wondered what it was. It was incredibly well packed, but eventually I opened it and discovered it was the result of an old FOIA request: the FBI "hijackers timeline", as referenced in the 9/11 Commission Report!

Glancing through, some of this looks familiar. If you've seen those Moussaoui documents detailing hijacker timelines, then this is very similar material: hijacker x lived here, flew there, spent money at this place, did flight training there etc. So it's not completely new. 

Still, there are 298 pages in total (though redacted in places), and plenty of material that I don’t recognise. I don’t have time to scan these all manually, so am paying for someone else to do it: this should be complete some time between Friday and next Monday. I will of course upload the finished results just as soon as I have them.

11th February

Apologies if you’ve had problems accessing the site: a hard drive crash meant it’s been offline for a few hours, and it then took a little while longer to get everything running again.

Still, I’ve discovered a useful collection of USA Today stories on the 9/11 flights, shut down of airspace and so on. You’ll have read most of them before, but these come in a more convenient PDF format, and they have the original (I presume) pictures, too. Download it here.

9th February

I’ve created a page for Delta Flight 1989. It doesn’t currently address any of the theories regarding the flight, though: it’s just to hold a collection of news reports.

Meanwhile, work continues on the Next Big Thing. Be patient.

5th February

I’m back to work now, but am also building something significant for the site. It’s something we really need, and I think you’ll like it (completely new content on a major issue), but the bad news is it’ll take some time to produce. There may not be any updates here for another week or so while I try to get it sorted out.

31st January

I’ve transferred the old discussion on whether NORAD just have recognised “the threat of terrorists hijacking commercial airliners and using them as guided missiles” to the new site. It’s all on one page now, but is still uncomfortably huge -- take a look here, if you really must.

29th January

I’ve transferred the “Dick Cheney was in charge of NORAD on 9/11” page over to the new site. There are several NORAD-related pages on there now, so I’ve also created a new Stand Down page and linked to it from the sidebar, making them easier to access.

28th January

Two days after the attacks, General Richard Myers said that he believed fighters weren’t launched on 9/11 until after the Pentagon was attacked. It’s been claimed that this was the clear story NORAD were putting out first of all, but the truth isn’t quite as simple as that. More here.

27th January

I spotted another video showing the last moments of Flight 175 at the BBC MotionGallery site, and added the clip to the relevant page. (It’s labelled “BBC MotionGallery”; you may need to scroll up the list to access it.)

26th January

I came across the full version of that “there’s a bomb in the building” clip, that’s sometimes used to show there were bombs at the WTC. It’s very 2006 as these arguments go, but you never know when they’ll come back, so I’ve created a page to host it. I’m thinking it would also be a good contender in a more substantial list of videos that have been misrepresented or carefully edited to support the “inside job” case. More on that later, maybe.

You might have come across a very short clip of part of the South Tower collapse that includes two large explosions, which of course has led some people to claim that it’s evidence for controlled demolition. The reality is the clip comes from the film “Rudy: The Rudy Giuliani Story”, though, and they seem to have added their own explosions for dramatic effect. You can view the short, full and original Camera Planet versions of the clip on this page. It’s not my discovery, and the clip doesn’t appear much these days anyway, but it’s worth remembering just in case you come across the footage in future.

25th January

My work’s finished, tax return done, and I’ll be deadline-free for at least a week. Which hopefully means a rush of 911myths updates, like these.

Did you know that, three years after the "dancing Israelis" were first arrested in the US, four of them filed a lawsuit against the US Department of Justice alleging unlawful incarceration and violations of their civil rights? Hardly the behaviour you'd expect if they were Mossad agents with connections to 9/11. I've added some reports here.

I've created a page to discuss the 9/11 report that "a truckload of explosives" was found near the George Washington bridge. It's not yet finished, but there's enough content to be useful.

I've also created a page to record "Mistaken September 11 reports". There's only brief reports on four examples at the moment, so it's just a beginning, but one of them may be new to you: the moment when Dan Rather announced video of Rudoplh Giuliani holding up a flight recorder recovered from the debris around the World Trade Centre. View it here.

23rd January.

I’ve created a Flash version of the NBC news clip showing fires across three floors of WTC7, and some lines of broken windows that suggest they’ve been quite hot. The reporter also says that Port Authority officials are concerned about the stability of the building. You’ll find the clip at the top of this page, and the bottom of this one. 

Work is nearly done, at last: half a page to go. Then I really need to complete my tax return before it’s too late (deadline is the end of the month), but after that I’ll get on with transferring content here.

21st January

Version 2.0 of Ryan Mackey’s “On Debunking 9/11 Debunking: Examining Dr. David Ray Griffin’s Latest Criticism of the NIST World Trade Center Investigation” is out. It’s an essential read for its comments on controlled demolition, even if you’ve never read the Griffin book, and you’ll find it here.

19th January

I’ve added a second short clip to yesterday’s new page showing more concern over the possibility that WTC7 might collapse. See it here.

18th January

Just as I thought I’d get some time off regular work, another 5 page job arrived. This is good from a professional point of view - the freelance world isn’t exactly secure, it’s great to be in demand - but equally I’d like to have some time off occasionally.

Anyway, I’ve taken a moment to create a new page, where I’ll be adding video clips and other quotes that show an expectation that WTC7 would collapse on 9/11. The first clip is up now, and you can probably guess which one it’ll be - but go check, just to be sure.

I’m building up quite a few WTC7 pages now, but don’t worry, they’ll all come together eventually. I’m now off to try and finish this new batch of work, and will hopefully be back here next Tuesday. Although as new work keeps appearing at the last minute, who knows what might happen?

17th January

600 words to go... Here’s another video hint of the “groove” damage to WTC7 (bottom of the list)..

16th January

Two more writing jobs to complete and I’ll be able to carry on here. In the meantime, I’ve added the news clips showing clearer views of WTC7 damage to the relevant page.

3rd January

I extracted a few WTC7 damage clips from the fire footage I uploaded last month, and created a separate clip: you can see it here. There’s so much smoke it’s hard to tell very much, but then we have to start somewhere. I’ll add the news footage with the better view once I get my current workload done, which probably means the end of next week at the earliest.

1st January 2008

Work is going to keep me away from updates for at least the next week, unfortunately. Still, there are plenty of other people working on interesting projects, and if you’ve ever come across the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth then you might be interested in this.

In addition, I came across a little piece from “Modern Marvels” where they talk about NORAD’s mission. It’s not really about 9/11, but does make some related points, including the emphasis on defending the borders of the US. It’s about a two minute video and you’ll find it here.

24th December

I’m off to do seasonal things for a day or two, but just before I go, here’s a link that promises interesting things to come. Have a great holiday!

21st December

I’ve created a page to discuss specific evidence behind the arguments that intercepts normally take place in 10 or 20 minutes. You’ll probably recognise most of the material, but hopefully will see how I’m trying to combine multiple pages from the old site into one, more useful whole. It’s also not quite finished yet, so I’ll probably clean things up a little before doing anything else new.

20th December

I’ve uploaded pages on "the Payne Stewart flight was intercepted in around 20 minutes" claim and the story that "Andrews Air Force Base had fighters on alert that could have been launched on 9/11". They’re not quite finished, and the second one seems particularly tedious, but hopefully they’ll come in useful at some point.

19th December

I’ve archived an interesting news article from immediately after 9/11, as it’ll be referenced later in something else I’m doing.

I also discovered this piece, written by al Qaeda spokesman Suleiman Abu Ghaith:

For what reason do we fight America?

Why is the world surprised and astonished?! For what reason were millions of people baffled by what happened to America on September 11, 2001; did the world really think that something other than this [would happen] or did the world expect something less than that? What happened to America constituted a natural matter and an expected event for a nation that has pursued a manner of terror, a policy of aggrandizement, and the law of force against nations and peoples, and imposed a single way, thought, and manner of life as if all people were employed in its government bureaus or were serving its companies and its economic establishments...

As for the justifications from which we, as an organisation, proceed and build our activities, plan out our direction and our manner of operation, these are operational and factual justifications that take into account happenings and readings of events. These are also knowledge-based and legal justifications that gives us feelings of assurance and certainties that what we are doing is for the aid of our religion and our community. It is not my purpose to record these justifications merely in order to justify what happened, but also to place them before you as a token of assurance that we will continue to strike the Americans and the Jews and to target them, whether as human targets or as institutions. What will come upon the Americans will not be any less than what has already come, so let America expect and prepare. It should take steps to prepare and tighten its seatbelts because we will come to it from a place they do not expect...
"Under the Shadow of the Spears", "Inside Jihad", David Cook

And it seems like something else that should be added to the “Responsibility” page.

15th December

NIST’s “Answers to Frequently Asked Questions” has a new supplement, just one page but well worth a look. 

13th December

I’ve had a good run of daily updates, but must put them on hold now while I go do other things. If you check this page regularly then I’d recommend you skip it for about a week, when hopefully I should be back with something more substantial than video uploads.

12th December

If you click the Download button (the arrow pointing down) for any of the WTC7 links listed below, then you’ll now be able to download a high quality MPEG-2 file of that footage. These files are big - over 500 MB if you download all 11 clips - and yes, I know, XviD versions, say, would have been much smaller. I didn’t want to lose any image quality by further encoding, though, so the MPEGs are all I’m making available right now.

11th December

All 11 WTC7 clips are now up. There’s some repetition between them because I’m making no effort to edit them or choose one clip over another: this will be about making everything available. Note that there are hints of the damage to the building just occasionally, when the smoke clears.

10th December

I’ve added a new WTC7 Fire Videos page with various clips (I’ll be adding seven more over the next few days). These are full DVD resolution and quite high quality, which makes them large: apologies if you’ve a slow Internet connection, but I think most people really want to see the detail. I’ll be linking in the original MPEGs at some point, too, for those who want the best quality versions.

9th December

After 9/11 copies of a letter were found in Atta’s luggage, Nawaf al-Hazmi’s rental car, and at the Flight 93 crash scene, apparently offering instructions and advice to the hijackers. Initial translations were almost immediately followed by questions over the document’s authenticity, and some of these points are still raised today. But are they valid? Find out more on this new page.

8th December

I’ve uploaded a full 15-minute MPEG of the Doubletree Pentagon video, and it’s available below the link to the short version on this page. It’s a bulky 147 MB and from what I can see shows little extra of value, though, so don’t expect too much...

7th December

I’ve simplified the new Flight 77 page by placing the Dulles and Pentagon security camera clips into one player, and added the last ten minutes of the Flight 77 NTSB animation.

6th December

Some people still try to claim that there was something significant in the June 1st 2001 change to hijacking procedures. Of course when you look at the previous document you can see that’s entirely untrue, so I’ve uploaded both the 1997 and 2001 versions to the new site.

5th December

A few months ago Dylan Avery created a torrent containing WTC floor plans. The following note was attached:

Inside this ZIP file you will find the entire architectural plans for the World Trade Center. This information was passed from a third party onto Steven Jones, and then onto me, where I uploaded it to our server and seeded it out onto the internet.

Excerpts from the letter sent to Dr. Jones:
"I was not sure if this information was available and I wanted to make sure that it first went to people who are well versed on the existing material. I have enclosed ... the architectural plans of the WTC Complex in .TIFF format. I have also included the WTC Tower collapse ... data that [we] compiled. My hope is that this can be posted on the appropriate websites and more people can make use of it. I would like to contribute my efforts where I can as I was on the ... team working for Silverstein Group ... in 2002."

I'm glad this vital evidence can finally be put into the public domain where it belongs. Many thanks to this individual, and to Dr. Jones for passing this information onto me.
-Dylan Avery
Louder Than Words

I've made the file available on an otherwise empty WTC page on the new site, just for those who aren't keen on torrents, and as a backup in case the torrent becomes unavailable. Click here to download directly (keeping in mind it's a chunky 558 MB).

4th December

The logs show people are still following links to a “basement bombs” page that hasn’t existed for a while, so I added a stub page to redirect them.

And I’ve plugged the new site on the front page of the old one, just for those visitors who never check here.

3rd December

I’m now back doing real-life work again, so updates here will be limited for the next two weeks or so. Today that meant rearranging pages on the new site to make the “debunking” content easier to access: that is, placing the Controversies section nearer the top of the page. Essentially small tweaks and file updates are all that’s going to happen for a while, so if that sounds dull, I’d recommend skipping this page until around the 17th December.

2nd December

One of the supposedly relevant portions of the August 6 Presidential Daily Brief was its supposed naming of New York as a potential target:

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.
http://911myths.com/index.php/Image:August_6_PDB.pdf

Of course the WTC towers weren't "federal buildings", but it still seems this might be relevant, perhaps some partially processed data that might have linked back to the 9/11 plot.

Unfortunately that's not the way it was:

This information was based on a report that two Yemeni men had been seen taking photographs of buildings at Federal Plaza in New York. The FBI later interviewed the men and determined that their conduct was consistent with tourist activity and the FBI's investigation identified no link to terrorism.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/04/20040410-5.html

It's a point you don't read too often, so I've added it to the PDB page.

1st December

I recently noticed this argument being used to support the idea that the CIA had "direct links" to bin Laden:

Since September 11, CIA officials have been claiming they had no direct link to bin Laden. These denials lack credibility. Earlier this year, the trial of defendants accused of the 1998 U.S. embassy bombing in Kenya disclosed that the CIA shipped high-powered sniper rifles directly to bin Laden's operation in 1989. Even the Tennessee-based manufacturer of the rifles confirmed this. According to the Boston Globe
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_CIA_Taliban.html

But there’s no link to let us explore this proof for ourselves, often a sign that something is being hidden. And sure enough, a closer look shows the shipment wasn't nearly as direct as the author pretends. Added to the bin Laden/CIA Links page.

30th November

bin Laden has released a new tape where he says it was unjust to invade Afghanistan because 9/11 was his doing, and the Afghan people and government were not involved:

It isn't hidden from you that the Afghans have tasted the two bitterest things for two decades at the hands of the Russians and their Communist agents, but they persevered, fought and were resolute and victorious, by the Grace of Allah. And before their wounds had healed and their grief had ended, they were invaded without right by your unjust governments, without stopping to think about or reflect on Bush's claim that this invasion was a response to the events of the 11th, although - as I mentioned previously - the events of Manhattan were a response to the American-Israeli coalition's murder of our people in Palestine and Lebanon.

And it was I who was responsible for 9/11, and I stress that all Afghans - both government and people - had no knowledge of those events, and America knows that, because some of the Taliban's ministers fell into its hands as captives, and they were interrogated and that became known. And that's why the Taliban government requested America to produce the evidence for the truth of its claims prior to the invasion, but it didn't produce any evidence, and instead insisted on invading; and Europe marched behind it in that, and had no choice but to be its vassal.

I’ve added this to the Responsibility page, and you can now view the full video there, too (it’s only about five minutes..

29th November

Added an extended version of the page on “bin Laden family were rushed out of the US while its airspace was still closed” to the new bin Laden section.

Added the “Jeb Bush declared martial law just before 9/11” page to the new site.

28th November

Transferred most of the Foreknowledge pages across to the new site, and added the section to the navigation menu.

27th November

Transferred the pages on bin Laden denying responsibility for the attacks (and the occasions when he admitted it) to the new site. 

25th November

Completed (hopefully) the Flight 175 video list with full-sized versions of the Park Foreman and Evan Fairbanks footage.

The prolific RKOwens4 has produced another YouTube video on how Cheney was really not in charge of NORAD on 9/11, after all. If you’ve read our pages here then it contains nothing new, but the comments are worth browsing just to see how abuse replaces substantive criticism. I suppose it’s hard to expect more from people who believe Alex Jones.

24th November

Uploaded another Flight 175 video here (PAX-TV).

The same source video also contained a CNN clip of the collapse of WTC7, along with some relevant comments, so I created a WTC7 Collapse Videos page to host it. Others will be added over time.

23rd November

The NORAD audio tapes were referenced by the 9/11 Commission, and document how NORAD staff acted and reacted as the events of the day progressed. The people behind Loose Change managed to get them released, a real achievement, and the files have been available in torrent form for some time. But I’ve also just uploaded them here, for the torrent-phobic, and you can find them as the first part of the new NORAD page. (Beware, though - they’re spread over 18 files totalling 1.56 GB in size.)

22nd November

I’ve transferred four bin Laden-related pages from the old to the new site, and you can access them from here. More will follow over the next few days, then I’ll flesh out the bin Laden page itself.

21st November

My long run of non-stop work has finally come to an end this afternoon, so I’ll be resuming proper updates tomorrow, if all goes well. In the meantime, here’s another Flight 175 video (check Jennifer Spell in the list).

18th November

I found a natural gap in my work when I could make an upgrade here, after all. But it’s not exactly anything important - just another Flight 175 video (CBS “Static Camera?”).

17th November

And here are the final two Flight 175 videos from this group (small, relatively low quality, and bottom of the list). I really must get on with real-life work now, so I’m going to break my recent run of daily updates: no more until I’ve finished, probably next Monday or Tuesday.

16th November

I’ve added yet another two Flight 175 videos to the usual page (scroll to the bottom, they’re the top two of the “Unnamed Source” clips). Only two more to go before I move on to other things. It might still be videos or similar limited updates for another day or two, though, as I’ll be tied up with real work until probably next Tuesday.

15th November

Another two Flight 175 videos are up.

14th November

Two more Flight 175 videos, from CNN and Pavel Hlava, have been uploaded here..

As I mentioned previously, I’ve made an FOIA application for the SEC “insider trading” memo referenced by the 9/11 Commission. The SEC said I couldn’t have that and used FOIA Exemption 5 as the justification, which essentially allows Government agencies to protect the “deliberative process”, the thinking behind the decision not to prosecute. 

That decision was to be expected, however recent FOIA court rulings have said you generally can’t use Exemption 5 to block an entire document: deliberative material may be witheld, but factual parts of the document (that don’t in themselves give away the deliberative process) must still be released.

I took legal advice and that also said there should be parts of the document that are releasable, so I’ve drafted and posted an appeal. With references to case law and everything! In reality they have all the cards, they can just say “but releasing any material would reveal the deliberative process” even if that is untrue or questionable, but still, we’ll see what happens. As ever with FOIA issues, don’t hold your breath: it could easily take a year before I hear anything more.

13th November

I’ve uploaded two more Flight 175 videos to the relevant page on the new site.

12th November

I’ve uploaded the section of the al Qaeda video The Nineteen Martyrs where they name and show pictures of all the hijackers. This is something of an issue for those who want to pretend the identifications are in doubt, which is probably why they avoid discussing the video at all. Anyway, you can find it at the top of the list on this page.

11th November

Added an inline video of the early CNN clip where they misidentify Wail al-Shehri, Abdulaziz al-Omari and Saeed al-Ghamdi to the new “Hijackers Still Alive” page. (This later caused those individuals to come forward and protest their innocence, contributing to the “still alive” story.)

Don’t worry, this isn’t turning into a video site. It’s just that I’m too busy to do real updates right now, and video additions are relatively straightforward. This will continue for the rest of next week as I have a bunch of Flight 175 videos to add, but hopefully after that I’ll finally get some significant free time...

10th November

Dr Keith Seffen of Cambridge University has written a paper called "Progressive Collapse of the World Trade Centre: a Simple Analysis", where he seems to think the collapse wasn’t such a surprise after all. Read it, along with unsurprising complaints that he doesn’t address molten metal, “near free-fall speeds” etc on this page.

It’s also worth looking at a Structure magazine article, “Single Point of Failure: How the Loss of One Column May Have Led to the Collapse of WTC 7”, perhaps a useful pointer to what the final NIST report is going to say.

9th November

We’re tired of seeing people pretend that the 2001 bin Laden “confession” video is the only one tying al Qaeda to the attacks. If you are, too, then take a look at some choice clips from the al Qaeda video, “Knowledge is for Acting Upon: The Manhattan Raids”. We’ll add more clips from other videos over time, as well as transferring the content across from the old page here.

8th November

Added three more videos showing the final moments of Flight 175 to this page.

7th November

A JREF forum member pointed out an article about William Rodriguez, with the following interesting detail:

Yet some of the claims Rodriguez has made about 9/11 don’t add up. He says an explosion occurred seven seconds before the first plane hit the towers, and came from below, not above. But when he first began to report this, he described the explosion as a “rumble,” like furniture moving. Today, he remembers it as a “POW!” Rodriguez claims the difference is due to translation errors...
http://wweek.com/wwire/?p=9889

Translation errors? Now I understand! So to make that perfectly clear, I’ve uploaded the video of Rodriguez’ first (voice-only) CNN appearance on the afternoon of 9/11. Both that and the 2002 video may be found here.

Note this piece from the above article, too:

Rodriguez also previously claimed a large fireball shot through the elevator shaft, exploding through the doors and burning the skin off one man’s body. But three years ago, Rodriguez began to back away from his account, claiming it was impossible for a fireball to have existed. Now, he says he was just going along with the official accounts of the New York fire department. “I was repeating everything as they told me to,” he says. At the time, Rodriguez claims he was being courted by members of the Republican Party , whose names he won’t disclose, to run for political office. “I was going with the official story,” he says. But Rodriguez says that once he started investigating, the story didn’t make sense.
http://wweek.com/wwire/?p=9889

So please, let’s not have any more pretence that Rodriguez has “always told the same story” or that the evil mass-media edited these early accounts.  Even he now says he’s changed his story.

Of course none of this explains why there’s no talk of pre-impact explosions in his lawsuit against Bush, Cheney and so on. Rodriguez plainly wasn’t “going with the official story” there, yet still failed to mention this key evidence. More here.

6th November

Uploaded the video of William Rodriguez September 11 2002 appearance on CNN to this new page. Notable for the absence of any talk of pre-impact explosions, as well as his belief that the first individual he helped was injured by a “ball of fire” that came down the “duct of the elevator itself”.

5th November

Added clips of the Flight 77 hijackers passing through security at Dulles Airport to the new site.

4th November

Added an ABC News clip showing the final moment of Flight 175. 

In addition I’ve changed the video player configuration so you can now view any of the clips full-screen (click the icon next to the “time to go” countdown on the right-hand side).

3rd November

Transferred the Pentagon Hijacking Drill page to the new site.

2nd November

Added the Citgo video to the new Flight 77 page. Links to the various analyses would help, too, but I have to start somewhere.

And if you’re interested in the Gordon Ross paper “Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Storeys of WTC 1”, then it’s worth also taking a look at a new JREF forum thread.

1st November

Added the old Pentagon Missile Batteries page to the new site. It now includes a video showing how planes come close to flying over the building, and you can find it here.

31st October

Transferred the old Israeli Art Students article to the new site, and it’s now available here.

30th October

I’ve had a reply from the SEC regarding my FOIA application (I’d asked for their memo on the “insider trading” investigation). My application was turned down under FOIA exemption 5. I believe there may be a basis for appeal, though, so am going to take some legal advice. I’ll report back when I know more.

I also added a couple more debris photos to the Flight 11 page. (More significant updates will follow when I have some time, probably next week. Right now I’ve too much work on, so small daily tweaks is the best I can do.)

29th October

Here's something you're going to find interesting, as spotted by JREF forum member boloboffin.

Start by visiting the ImplosionWorld Cinema. Choose the Philips building (top of the two rows, right-hand side) and watch the video. Pay particular attention when the timer gets past 10 seconds. You'll hear an explosion, see smoke shoot out from the centre base of the building, then hear another set of explosions, then the building falls. Repeat that a few times so you're familar with the timing.

Take a look at the same implosion from another angle. We don't have the same view of the base of the building this time, but you can still hear loud explosions before and after first smoke shoots out.

Now visit this page at the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

And isn't that strange? Now there's no explosions at all, and what's more you can hear the building fall before it actually happens. It appears this version of the video has either had the explosions removed and seen the rest of the collapse sound moved forward to cover it (which would explain the silent second or two at the end), or perhaps has had the complete audio track added from somewhere else.

So much for "truth", huh? And yet another reason not to trust your eyes (or your ears) when you're visiting 9/11 sites. Check the original sources: it's the only way. (And that applies to this site, too. I don’t want you to “trust” me - I want you to know I have a point because you’ve looked into it properly.)

28th October

Scott Forbes tells us that a power down started for the upper part of WTC2 around noon on Saturday the 8th of September. However, a JREF forum member recently discovered tickets showing someone visited the observation deck at the top of that tower at 13:41 on the Saturday, indicating there was at least enough power to keep that running:



Forbes has already said he can only confirm conditions on his floor, so this doesn’t kill his story, but it does confirm that in one part of the towers at least it was business as usual. 

Added to the relevant page. (Which is getting messy now, but I’ll reorganise when I’ve transferred it to the new site.)

27th October

Added the four minute audio of Betty Ong’s telephone call to the Flight 11 page.

26th October

It’s an argument we hear all the time when Barbara Olson’s Flight 77 calls are brought up: “You can’t use an Airfone without a credit card!”. Todd Beamer’s story from Flight 93 showed that you can reach the operator by pressing one key, though, and now a JREF thread pointed us to instructions confirming the same. See a screen grab at the bottom of this page.

25th October

CeeCee Lyles was a flight attendant on Flight 93, and on 9/11 she left an answering machine message talking about the hijacking. This has been available for a while in a Flash applet used at the Moussaoui trial, but that’s not the most convenient of formats, so I’ve used a Flash decompiler to extract the audio and save it as a separate MP3 file. That’s now available in my Flight 93 audio section, and you can use the download button to save a local copy to your PC.

Adding this kind of evidence to the site is useful, I think, but the current layout means it’s more difficult to find the old “debunking” content than it used to be. But I think I can fix that by moving the Controversies section nearer the top of the page, like this. That lets you quickly find the link to apathoid’s remote control paper, say, while still leaving the photos, videos, documents and other items within easy reach. Better? Email and let me know what you think if it’s something you care about, otherwise I’ll decide for myself in the next few days.

24th October

Added a new witness account to the Flight 175 evidence page.

Fixed yet more broken links on the old site. What a mess. The web design software claimed to have uploaded everything, but, well, it wasn’t even close...

23rd October

Added shortened versions of the Pentagon and Doubletree security camera footage to the Flight 77 page. Links to the full versions will be added soon.

22nd October

Added a few more witness accounts to the Flight 11 and Flight 175 evidence pages.

Restored a WTC7 image that had presumably been broken since the site migration.

21st October

A JREF forum member created a Google Earth file to map the flight path of Flight 77, and the final moments of Flight 93. I’ve finally got around to adding it to the new pages, and you can download it here.

20th October

I’ve created FLV versions of the Flight 175 approach videos, and they’re now available in the new Flash video player. 

19th October

Fixed a few broken links left over from the last site migration.

In the last day or two I’ve added a few more witness accounts for the approach of Flight 175 to the WTC. That page is also a good candidate for our new Flash video player (see yesterday): I’ll convert the videos there next.

18th October

After much thought, tweaking and experimentation, I’ve finally managed to produce a decent inline video add-on for the new site. And its first use is to collect together the various hijackers video wills. Take a look here (below the photos).

9th October

That’s it, all done - we’ve moved hosts (again). But this time, as you can hopefully see, it’s different. The site is considerably faster and should stay that way, even at the busiest of times.

6th October

Well, I’ve had it with dodgy web hosts who don’t deliver what they promise. It’s time to get a dedicated server with someone who knows what they’re doing. The down side is that’s expensive and the site may be briefly offline while I switch. But on the other hand, once it’s done, the site should be vastly more responsive, I’ll be able to do more with it, and I’ll never have to move again. Hopefully. Just bear in mind that this is more complicated than regular hosting, so don’t be surprised if there are a few initial problems. Wish me luck...

1st October

There’s still way too much to do, but I promised a first look at the framework for the new site today, and so that’s exactly what you’re going to get.

Don’t get too excited, though. There are only two sections (“The Hijackers” and “The Flights”), and most of the significant new additions are based on collecting together evidence rather than anything else (timelines, for instance).

Still, at least you can now see why it’s been so quiet around here recently. Click here to explore..

Update: This wasn’t good timing - my web host has had problems more or less since I posted the above, which has made for truly snail-like performance. They say they’re fixing it now, but it still seems poor to me. My advice: leave exploring the new site until tomorrow, that should save you a lot of frustrations.

25th September

Read about Dylan Avery vs William Rodriguez at Screw Loose Change, ideally while trying to remember that none of this is about the money. Obviously. Then catch any follow-ups in this thread, and another over here.

Meanwhile, I have four assignments and a total of eleven pages to complete before I’m free to get the new 911myths.com pages sort-of ready for public viewing. Gulp. Well, they’re going online on October 1st whatever happens, so I’ll have to do the best I can. Check in next Monday, see how it worked out.

22nd September

Ryan Mackey has a new version of his commentary on the NIST section of David Ray Griffin’s “Debunking 9/11 Debunking”. No major changes apparently, but nonetheless it would be wise to keep your copy up-to-date. Click here to download

20th September

Al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden is calling on Pakistanis to rebel against President Pervez Musharraf in a new audiotape.

The announcement of the upcoming message came as al-Qaida released a new video in which bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, boasted that the United States was being defeated in Afghanistan, Iraq and other fronts.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6936207,00.html

Hmm. If “bin Laden is a CIA asset” or “all bin Laden tapes are faked by the US” then why would such an unhelpful message be released? Still, never mind. I’m sure someone will reverse engineer an improbable explanation, soon enough. Better that than admit they might be wrong.

The opening of 911myths.com v2.0 (beta version) is still on for the beginning of next month. It’ll more or less be as I’ve mentioned before - roughly the equivalent of two of the sections from here, about 100 pages in total, very few of them finished but hopefully near enough to be useful. Although of course you’ll be the judge of that...

11th September

Waleed al-Shehri has had his video will released, then. So will that persuade those who still claim he’s alive that they might be wrong? No, of course not - instead they use the “still alive” story to claim that the video must be fake! Hilarious. 

It does make me wonder how much evidence might be required to show that they’re wrong, though. We already know, for instance, that the still alive al-Shehri:

• Has the wrong name (Waleed Ahmed al-Shehri, not Waleed Mohammad al-Shehri)
• Is the wrong age (he began flight training when the hijacker al-Shehri was 14/15)
• Has the wrong face (newspaper photos show a different guy)
• Has the wrong family (doesn’t have a brother called Wail, meanwhile the hijacker’s family have spoken out and say he is missing)

Now a man who looks like the hijacker, but not the still alive pilot al-Shehri, shows up in an al-Qaeda video. Isn’t there a point where people might actually begin to think that maybe, perhaps, just possibly, this identification was correct, after all?

21st July

Margie Burns is the writer who first reported that Wirt D Walker III, of Stratesec, Securacom and Marvin Bush fame, was related to Bush. It’s reported as definitive, proven fact by some, so I was interested to read a page from last year where even she seems to back away from the claim:

A former colleague of the head of the company, Wirt Dexter Walker III, suggested to me that Walker is a distant relative of the Bush family. While any blood relationship to the Bush Walkers would have to be remote (the first Wirt D. Walker, two generations ago, was based in Chicago; the second in McLean, Virginia, in the DIA), there is no doubt that the company, Kuwait’s Al Sabahs, and Bush financial interests were closely linked for years. Management and control at Wirt Walker’s other companies, a small airplane company named Commander Aircraft (also bankrupt) and a private investment firm named KuwAm (short for Kuwait-American Corporation), were inextricably linked to management and control at Securacom.
http://www.margieburns.com/blog/_archives/2006/2/26/1784217.html

The previous version, that he is “a distant relative” now becomes merely a “suggestion” from a former colleague, and even Burns reports that he must be a very distant relative indeed. Something worth remembering the next time someone tells you they’re cousins. Although it’s also worth keeping in mind that their relationship is evidence of precisely nothing, anyway. 

20th July

Our Italian 9/11 debunking friends have obtained a copy of the Flight 93 NTSB animation, and kept it to themselves in order to sell DVDs and make some cash. Oops, no, sorry, that's entirely wrong - they've actually used it to create a video that they've uploaded to YouTube, so everyone can view the images.  The captions are in Italian but that's unimportant, you can easily figure out what's going on. Start with part #1 here.

3rd July

One frequently mentioned motive for 9/11 is the “missing $2.3 trillion” that “Rumsfeld announced on September 10th 2001”. Of course the reality is very different, more of an accounting systems issue than actually having “missing money”, and as we’ve pointed out, was public knowledge long before 9/11 anyway. 

What we missed were the very first reports, though. 

The military's money managers last year made almost $7 trillion in adjustments to their financial ledgers in an attempt to make them add up, the Pentagon's inspector general said in a report released Friday.

The Pentagon could not show receipts for $2.3 trillion of those changes, and half a trillion dollars of it was just corrections of mistakes made in earlier adjustments.

Each adjustment represents a Defense Department accountant's attempt to correct a discrepancy. The military has hundreds of computer systems to run accounts as diverse as health care, payroll and inventory. But they are not integrated, don't produce numbers up to accounting standards and fail to keep running totals of what's coming in and what's going out, Pentagon and congressional officials said.
http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002hxm

When was this inspector general report released? The end of February 2000, almost a year before Rumsfeld was sworn in (January 20th 2001). So remind me again: why would he be responsible for this, what would be the incentive to cover up the previous administration’s failings, and if he wanted to do that, then why talk about it before 9/11 anyway? 

27th June

Apologies for the lack of updates, but just recently I’ve been spending more time working on the new site, and most of the new content has been going there. It’s still very early days, but I’m hoping the first section (roughly equivalent to “Hijackers” here) will be viewable by some time in August. In the meantime, this site will be updated only occasionally.

It’s interesting to see that the story about there being no airphones on Flight 77 has been resurrected again. In particular, we’re told that American Airlines removed their airphones from 757’s prior to 9/11, therefore Barbara Olson couldn’t have used one to make her calls. 911myths contributor apathoid found some photos reportedly of AA 757 cabins from 2002 and 2003, though, both of which show airphones:



There are also questions over a document supporting this story which have yet to be resolved. Read the 911blogger post, original article and JREF forum thread to find out more.

20th June

A sad story today about a fire that claimed the lives of nine firemen when the roof of the building they were searching collapsed. It's perhaps too early to identify the cause, however:

Capt. Ralph Linderman of the St. Andrews Fire Department said the blaze was the hottest he could recall in three decades of firefighting. "That fire bent steel like a wet noodle," he said...

Charleston Fire Capt. Jake Jenkins said the firefighters were spread out in teams when the roof - a steel truss system - collapsed. Other crews fought to get inside the building and rescue the fallen, but the conditions were too bad, he said.
http://www.theeagle.com/stories/062007/nation_20070620021.php

4th June

The 9/11 "no planers" are turning on William Rodriguez.

And Frank Greening is now working with Zdenek Bazant and others on a paper called "Collapse of World Trade Center Towers: What Did and Did Not Cause It". Find a first draft here.

Meanwhile I’m discovering that creating the new site is probably going to take considerably longer than I’d imagined. And so I have a new plan. I’ll aim to get one section to the point where it’s hopefully useful, open that to the public, then run both sites side by side while development continues. It’s going to be messy for a while, but I think when you see what’s happening you’ll agree that the move is worth the effort.

26th May

Was WTC7 really expected to collapse? Yes, at least according to this firefighter, who tells us that WTC7 is leaning, coming down, and there’s no way to stop it because “the structural integrity is not there".

24th May

A JREF forum contributor sent an FOIA request to the NTSB asking for the Flight 77 animation, and received it today on a DVD. He's already made it available for download via Torrent, and you can find it here. Beware, though, this is the full, high-quality animation and is 3.26 GB in size.

21st May

This site was successfully uploaded to the new host overnight. Now a quick DNS change and you should be using it within hours. (Don’t get excited, it’s just a copy of this one, but the new host will provide the features I need to begin the redesign process.)

Update: the move seems to have gone smoothly, and if you’re reading this then you’re now viewing the site on our new host.

Meanwhile, a new blog comments on the "Failure of the ‘Truth’ Movement's Engineer", Gordon Ross.

And contributor Mark Roberts now has some detailed new sites of his own. He points us to:

Links for 9/11 Research
A thousand or so categorized links, and several "mini sites" that are expanded versions of longer posts I've made [at forums.randi.org].

World Trade Center Building 7 and the Lies of the 9/11 Truth Movement (now online and updated)

William Rodriguez, Escape Artist

20th May

As a part of the ongoing plans to rebuild this site, we’ll be moving to a new host, most probably some time tomorrow. In theory you shouldn’t notice the difference. In practice, who knows? So if the site disappears for a while, or starts behaving oddly, don’t worry, it’s probably not your fault. Come back in 24 hours and hopefully all will be well. (Feel free to send me an email if it isn’t.)

19th May

Mark Iradian, of "Screw Loose Change" video fame, is back with “9/11 Deniers Speak - Ground Zero Edition”. As Mark says at the beginning, the video is "not a scentific rebuttal to the various myths surrounding 9/11", instead concentrating on "simply exposing the behaviour of the 9/11 Truth Movement on Ground Zero", but I think you'll find it no less worth watching for that. Find it here.

17th May

It happens all the time: you're faced with a surprising 9/11 claim, but on checking the source discover the truth is very, very different. However, if you thought you'd seen them all, then a new post at Screw Loose Change might convince you otherwise. Because they noticed that a forum post saying this:

Todd Beamer's wife told Larry King on CNN on 23 Aug 2002 that he is still alive.

...was actually based on a transcript that said this:

KING: So you feel Todd is somewhere now?

BEAMER: Absolutely. Todd is still alive. He is alive in a much different scenario than he was last year at this time, but...

KING: Watching you and the babies?

BEAMER: I don't know how much influence he has or knowledge he has of what goes on here. The Bible doesn't give us really a complete picture of the connection between Heaven and Earth. But I do know that he's experiencing the presence of God. And he is more alive now than he was before. And I'll join him some day.

I really don't know what to say...

12th May

I downloaded my PDF copy of the 9/11 Report from the Commission site, years ago, and soon discovered an annoying problem: you couldn’t select and copy text to the clipboard. I eventually accepted “that’s just the way it is”, but now I've noticed that the copy on gpoaccess.gov doesn't have that problem, you can copy text just fine. So if you’re still using the restricted version, grab this one instead.

11th May

The account of Brian Clark is sometimes used as proof that there was no major fire at the WTC:

Some defenders of the official story have claimed that the fires were indeed very big, turning the buildings into "towering infernos." But all the evidence counts against this claim, especially with regard to the south tower, which collapsed first. This tower was struck between floors 78 and 84, so that region is where the fire would have been the biggest. And yet Brian Clark, a survivor, said that when he got down to the 80th floor: "You could see through the wall and the cracks and see flames . . . just licking up, not a roaring inferno, just quiet flames licking up and smoke sort of eking through the wall." Likewise, one of the fire chiefs who had reached the 78th floor found only "two isolated pockets of fire."
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/04/338179.shtml

The 80th floor wasn’t the most seriously affected by fire, but if it was as Clark described then it would still be a surprise. But, guess what? He doesn’t actually say the 80th floor, at least in the sources we’ve found. The New York Times places this three floors down:

Somewhere around the 77th floor, the stairway walls were cracked, and you could look through the cracks and see flames. They were just quietly licking up, not a roaring inferno. And there was some smoke there, but again I think the stairs were pressurized, pushing the air out so we had less smoke in the stairway than you might imagine.
New York Times "Accounts from the South Tower"
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/26/nyregion/26STOWER.html?pagewanted=7&ei=5070&en=d2d1b3582a3390fa&ex=1179028800

NIST place no significant fire at all on the 77th floor, so what Clark saw doesn’t seem quite so interesting after all. Still, we’ve added it to the end of this page for future reference.

10th May

CNN and other media reports said Ziad Jarrah was returning from Afghanistan through Dubai on January 30th 2001, when he was questioned by local officials. But his family say he was visiting his sick father in Lebanon, from January 26th 2001 until early February. So is this evidence that there’s something wrong with the official timeline? Maybe not, as actually there could be a very simple explanation. So simple we’re betting some of you may have spotted it already. Read more here.

(Please note that we’re dealing here with only part of one of the double or timeline inconsistency claims regarding the hijackers, and there’s about another hundred to go. So yes, we know this barely touches the topic. We have to start somewhere, though, and this is an interesting example of how claimed conflicts aren’t always just as they appear.)

7th May

I was reading about the put options again recently, when I wondered if the SEC might have any useful related documents that could be obtainable under a Freedom of Information Act request. The 9/11 Commission Report makes reference to an “SEC memo, Division of Enforcement to SEC Chair and Commissioners, "Pre-September 11, 2001 Trading Review," May 15 2002”, which from what I can see hasn’t been made public yet. I don’t suppose they’ll provide the names of the traders, but maybe the memo contains other useful information, so I decided to ask for it. I’ll let you know what happens, but as ever, don’t hold your breath.

5th May

There's much excitement over a new claim that "Bush [was] Told Of First Attack On 9/11 Before He Left Florida Hotel", where reporters asked if he'd heard what had happened in New York and he said he'd talk about it later. We're told that this "re-emphasizes the fact that President Bush lied about how he first came to know about the events of September 11, 2001". But as usual, the desperation for a "smoking gun" is such that potential problems are quickly brushed aside. In particular, the first impact didn't occur until after 8:46, and wasn't reported on the news until a minute or two later (CNN had footage on the air at 8:49), yet Bush reportedly left his hotel at 8:35. So how did reporters at the hotel get to know about an event that hadn't even occurred yet?

2nd May

You might have come across a claim recently that Barbara Olson couldn’t have used airfones to make her 9/11 calls from Flight 77, because supposedly the plane didn’t have any. And doubtless forums across the web have been filled with people saying “explain that, then!!!”. So I think that’s exactly what Screw Loose Change have done.

1st May

The creator of the Screw 9/11 Mysteries movie now has an accompanying Flash-based web site, which is “the home on the web of the 9/11 Mysteries Viewer's Guide, a debunking of the popular 9/11 Conspiracy film '9/11 Mysteries'.”

30th April

You’ve probably seen it on YouTube or Google Video: a short clip of a firefighter on 9/11 saying “bomb in the building, start clearing out”, which is taken as supporting the case that there were explosives in the towers. But what building was he referring to? We’ve found a clip that provides the answer.

27th April

An email acknowledgement arrived yesterday regarding my most recent FOIA request to the FAA (see below). That was unusually quick and efficient: now let’s see if they’re just as good about actually releasing something.

This site aims to cover just as many points as it possibly can, and while I think ultimately that’ll be very useful, right now it’s beginning to cause problems. There’s just too much data here now, it’s hard to find what you need. Fortunately, while I cover the tiny details here and there, others are working on providing similar information in a more accessible form, and there’s no better example of this than in the following two Google videos: How Fast Did WTC7 Fall? and But WTC Wasn't Hit By A Plane!, both of which last under three minutes but still find time to explain how those common “inside job” claims leave out more than a little crucial information.

And on the point of site structure, I’ve finally finished evaluating potential software for the next version of 911myths.com, and will be using MediaWiki, the package behind Wikipedia. While there are better options around, they tended to have significantly greater server requirements that would have at least quadrupled my hosting costs, so I opted for the budget, though still very effective solution. I also have a new host, so once I’ve set up the latest MediaWiki version I’ll be ready to start creating pages.

25th April

In the latest FOIA news, it seems I can’t get White House visitor records just yet as there are court cases going on to find out whether they belong to the Secret Service (in which case they’re accessible under the FOIA) or the White House (in which case they’re not). So legal advice there is to wait. Perhaps for years, unfortunately.

And, as I suspected, I’ve heard nothing back from NORAD about obtaining their 9/11 tapes. Time to contact them again.

In the meantime, I’ve filed a couple more requests (hey, you’ve got to keep trying). I’ve already asked for the transcript of the main conference call that was ongoing through 9/11 (White House, Pentagon, FAA etc), but I suspect that’s one of those applications that will take 5 or 10 years before they reply (and then it’ll be “no”). So I’ve asked the FAA for a document recalling their timetable for the day, including who joined what conferences and when. It’s a much smaller requirement, so perhaps they’ll let me have it...?

And as the FBI actually sent me something recently, I thought I’d try again by asking for a hijacker chronology they’ve produced. We need more details about where they were and when, and even if you don’t believe a word of it, it’ll still be useful to know what the complete FBI story actually is. 

10th April

Some people tell me this site mainly tackles “straw men”, that no-one really argues most of the points addressed here. Perhaps they should take a look at this, a truly dreadful article from Pravda. The author:

• Pretends that the CNN victims lists were passenger manifests, so he can say there were no Arab names on them. Wrong.
• Says "at least seven of the nineteen 'hijackers' are still alive" as though it's been proved, ignoring the documented cases of mistaken identity.
• Says the WTC fell at "the speed of gravity". Uh, what?
• Says the official story is that fire melted the steel. No, it isn’t.
• Says "only explosions" could have caused the 2.1 and 2.3 seismic readings, with no supporting evidence.
• Says "the weekend before the 9/11 WTC demolition, all power was shut down to install "computer cables."" - even Scott Forbes doesn't say all power was lost.
• Says "No one was allowed inside and all security cameras and alarms had no power for 30 hours" - Forbes doesn't say that, either. In fact he worked there over the weekend so that would contradict him.
• Says "computer cables don't connect with building electricity, so the need to turn off and close both towers to do so is indicative of another motive, like planting charges without alarms and video surveillance", without pointing out the possibility that it may also mean the power down story was false.
• Says "Marvin Bush, brother to President George and Jeb, was a principal in Securacom, which was in charge of security for the World Trade Center". Doesn't point out that Bush left in 2000. Doesn't explain how Securacom were "in charge of security for the World Trade Center" (there's no evidence for that at all).
• Says "a steel beam weighing twice as much as a Boeing 767 flew from one WTC building over 390 feet to bury itself very deeply into the neighboring American Express building". But that's based on http://www.911da.org/crr/images/CRRDB/data/documents/3424.htm , where they've made a typo, claiming a beam weighed "600,000 pounds". I'd be surprised if it was a tenth of that.
• Says WTC7 received "no damage" from the collapse of the towers. Uh-huh.
• Compares 9/11 with the B25/ Empire State Building without mentioning the differences in plane scale and building construction. More here.
• Says "Yet not one usable black box was ever recovered from any of the four planes that reputedly were hijacked on 9/11. Not one". Actually 3 usable recorders were recovered, but let's not let the facts get in the way, right?

Astonishing. Even by Pravda’s standards. And a good example of how many of the distortions, omissions and fictions I began documenting years ago, persist right up to the current day.

6th April

You’ll often find transcripts of witness statements used on 9/11 sites. Here’s one used to support a “controlled demolition at the WTC argument, for instance”:

A description of what appeared to be a ring of explosions was also given by Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick, who said: "We looked up at the [south tower] . .