Sound Off !
Tony Lee's reply to John Evans's reply to "9/11: Fact or Fiction?"
December 11, 2013
Category: Society > Government and Politics
I want to first thank John Evans for his thoughtful and detailed response to my article, “9/11: Fact or Fiction?" I’d like to address some of his statements and provide more information.
John misperceived me as having goals and motivations that I do not have. Let me be clear. I am convinced the 9/11 Commission Report is not accurate, and the twin towers and WTC 7 were brought down by explosives. That’s it! I don’t know who set the explosives and I’m not saying “some unnamed US organization” did it.
I am not “proselytizing” and any religious or faith-based suggestions are offensive. I’m a CPA. I consulted and testified as an expert witness for 25 years. I rely on facts.
There is now a professional association of more than 2000 licensed building professionals, collectively known as Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, who are challenging the NIST report. These professionals, many of whom are acknowledged experts in their fields, provide scientific and forensic analyses, including eyewitness reports, in the areas of structural steel, fire protection, fire fighting, metallurgy, explosives, and demolition. They all conclude the buildings were brought down by explosives in controlled-demolition operations. These individuals are professionals, not “conspiracy theorists.”
The video record of the WTC 7 collapse shows the top elevator house collapsing first, the outside edges of the building falling in perfect symmetry, and the 47-story building collapsing at nearly free-fall speed in 7 seconds. This could only happen in a controlled-demolition operation. NIST concluded the collapse was caused by office fires, even though it now acknowledges that free fall did occur.
In his article, in support of the findings of the 9/11 Commission Report, John mentioned an interview with an architect whose opinion stands against that of the more than 2000 architects and engineers for 9/11 Truth. The twin towers were built to absorb an airplane crash and did. Fires inside the buildings were not nearly hot enough to affect the steel. There is no proof that jet fuel induced fires resulted in temperatures exceeding 480°F, whereas 2800°F is required to melt steel and 1100°F to soften steel. People evacuating the building descended through the impact zone minutes before the building collapsed and reported only a moderate temperature increase.
The Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth website presents over 20 ways, all explained in detail in the videos, in which the twin towers and WTC 7 exhibited the characteristics of classic controlled demolition with explosives. Foremost among these were:
- Over 100 first responders reported hearing explosions
- There was an extremely rapid onset of destruction
- All three collapses were at nearly free-fall speed
- Multi-ton steel sections were ejected laterally
- 90,000 tons of concrete and metal decking in the twin towers were pulverized in mid air
- No pancaked floors were found
- Isolated explosive ejections occurred 20-40 stories below the demolition front
- The steel frame was completely dismembered
- Evidence of thermite incendiaries was found in steel samples
- Evidence of explosives was found in dust samples
- Several tons of molten metal were found under the buildings
The website also gives reasons why the buildings exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, which would include:
- A slow onset with large visible deformations
- Asymmetrical collapse
- Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
9/11 had a profound effect on our country. Over 3000 innocent people died on that day and countless more in the wars that followed. In the light of overwhelming and compelling evidence that seriously challenges the official 9/11 Commission Report, we owe it to those who died and to their surviving families to revisit the events of that day and the conclusions of the report. Along with a growing group of thoughtful people, I believe a new independent investigation is needed.