Engineer Sees Evidence of Extreme Temperatures in WTC Steel

A structural engineer who was a member of the team assembled by the American Society of Civil Engineers to investigate the World Trade Center site after 9/11 has described numerous phenomena indicating extremely high temperatures suffered by the WTC structural steel. This appears to be further evidence that high-temperature explosives, such as thermate, were used to bring down the towers.

Dr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl is a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California at Berkeley, who specializes in studying structural damage done by earthquakes and terrorist bombings. He flew to New York on September 19, 2001 to conduct a two-week reconnaissance of the collapsed towers, hoping to gain an understanding of how they'd come down. He was able to examine numerous pieces of steel taken from Ground Zero. [1]

He said the towers were exceptionally well designed and built, describing the WTC as "the best-designed building I have ever seen." [2] Yet the structural steel had suffered unusual warping and other major damage:

• Astaneh-Asl said that steel flanges "had been reduced from an inch thick to paper thin." [3]

• At a recycling center in New Jersey, he saw 10-ton steel beams from the towers that "looked like giant sticks of twisted licorice." [4] He showed the San Francisco Chronicle a "banana-shaped, rust-colored piece of steel" that had somehow "twisted like toffee during the terrorist attack." [5]

• He noted the way steel from the WTC had bent at several connection points that had joined the floors to the vertical columns. He described the connections as being smoothly warped, saying, "If you remember the Salvador Dali paintings with the clocks that are kind of melted--it's kind of like that." He added, "That could only happen if you get steel yellow hot or white hot--perhaps around 2,000 degrees." [6]

• In an interview in 2007, Astaneh-Asl recalled, "I saw melting of girders in [the] World Trade Center." [7]

• He found a foot-long twisted shard of steel that was "like a piece of bread, but it was high-strength steel." He commented, "I haven't seen anything like this [before]." [8]

• He came across "severely scorched [steel] members from 40 or so floors below the points of impact [by the planes]." [9]

• The fireproofing that had been used to protect the WTC steel also showed evidence of extreme conditions. In some places it had "melted into a glassy residue." [10]

• Astaneh-Asl saw a charred I-beam from WTC Building 7--a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed late in the afternoon of 9/11, even though no plane hit it. "The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized." [11]

These observations indicate that the World Trade Center steel was subjected to very high temperatures. Yet, while postulating that the towers collapsed due to fire (and without the use of explosives), even Thomas Eagar--an engineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology--admitted, "The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel." [12] One must conclude that the phenomena observed by Astaneh-Asl are therefore highly suspicious.

It may well have been because it offered such revealing clues that the remaining structural steel from the World Trade Center was so rapidly destroyed, being shipped abroad as scrap to be melted down and recycled. CBS News described: "The [cleanup] operation--which began days after the collapse, okayed by then-New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani--goes on 24 hours a day, seven days a week. As a result, Astaneh has almost certainly missed seeing crucial pieces before they were cut up and sent overseas." [13] As the New York Times reported, the steel scrap was worth "only a few million dollars, a tiny fraction of the billions of dollars the cleanup" was going to cost. Yet the knowledge that could have been gained from it "could save lives in a future disaster." [14]

NOTES
[1] Kenneth Chang, "Scarred Steel Holds Clues, and Remedies." New York Times, October 2, 2001; Robert Sanders, "Report from Ground Zero." Berkeleyan, October 3, 2001; Jeffrey R. Young, "Scholars Work to Rebuild the World Trade Center Virtually." Chronicle of Higher Education, December 7, 2001.
[2] Keay Davidson, "Berkeley Professor Seeks the Safer Skyscraper." San Francisco Chronicle, October 22, 2001.
[3] Robert Sanders, "Report from Ground Zero."
[4] Jeffrey R. Young, "Scholars Work to Rebuild the World Trade Center Virtually."
[5] Keay Davidson, "Berkeley Professor Seeks the Safer Skyscraper."
[6] Jeffrey R. Young, "Scholars Work to Rebuild the World Trade Center Virtually."
[7] "Collapse of Overpass in California Becomes Lesson in Construction." NewsHour, PBS, May 10, 2007.
[8] Pamitha Reynolds, "Berkeley Prof Analyzes Structural Damage of the WTC." Berkeley Daily Planet, October 20, 2001.
[9] David Kohn, "Culling Through Mangled Steel." CBS News, March 12, 2002.
[10] Kenneth Chang, "Scarred Steel Holds Clues, and Remedies."
[11] Ibid.
[12] Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso, "Why Did the World Trade Center Collapse? Science, Engineering, and Speculation." Journal of the Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society 53 (12) 2001: 8-11.
[13] David Kohn, "Culling Through Mangled Steel."
[14] Kenneth Chang, "Scarred Steel Holds Clues, and Remedies."

The Flight 77 Murder Mystery: Who Really Killed Charles Burlingame?

According to the official account of 9/11, American Airlines Flight 77--which supposedly crashed into the Pentagon--was hijacked shortly after 8:51 a.m. on September 11, 2001. This claim is so central to the U.S. government's story that we would reasonably expect it to have been proven. Yet a closer analysis of the evidence shows that, in fact, it appears preposterous.

THE TOUGH PILOT
The first thing to recognize when evaluating the official Flight 77 story is that the plane's pilot was a former military man, and a genuinely tough guy. Captain Charles "Chic" Burlingame had graduated from the United States Naval Academy in 1971. He served eight years on active duty as a fighter pilot, and served several tours at the Navy's elite Top Gun school. He then spent 17 years in the Naval Reserve before retiring from the military in 1996. [1] During his military career, he had tours in Vietnam and the 1991 Gulf War. [2] His sister Debra Burlingame described him as "a guy that's been through SERE [Survival Evasion Resistance Escape] school in the Navy and had very tough psychological and physical preparation." She said, "If there was any chance of saving [Flight 77], this was the kind of guy who would have been able to do that." [3] Admiral Timothy Keating was a good friend of Burlingame's, having been a classmate of his in the Navy and attended flight school with him. He told CNN: "I was in a plebe summer boxing match with Chic, and he pounded me. ... Chic was really tough." [4] Even up to his death Burlingame enjoyed boating, in-line skating, and weightlifting, and was "in great shape," according to his friend Steve Brooks. [5]

Surely it would take a particularly formidable team of terrorists to wrestle control of a plane from a man like this? Yet here is where the official story falls apart at the first hurdle. The supposed hijackers in fact appear to have been a group of weaklings.

THE FEEBLE HIJACKERS
The five men who allegedly hijacked Flight 77 comprised of a pilot, Hani Hanjour, and four "muscle" hijackers who'd been tasked with storming the cockpit and controlling the passengers: Majed Moqed, Khalid al Mihdhar, Nawaf al Hazmi, and his brother Salem al Hazmi. However, as the 9/11 Commission pointed out, "The so-called muscle hijackers actually were not physically imposing," with the majority of them being between 5'5" and 5'7" in height, "and slender in build." [6] As their ID cards have revealed, Salem al Hazmi was just 5'4" tall and Khalid al Mihdhar's was 5'6". [7]

Between September 2 and September 6, 2001, about a week before the attacks, the five alleged hijackers attended Gold's Gym in Greenbelt, Maryland, where, reportedly, they were "awkwardly lifting weights and using resistance machines." [8] Gold's Gym regional manager Spero Courtis has described, "They seemed not to really know what they were doing." [9] According to Gene LaMott, the CEO of Gold's Gym International Inc.: "They weren't on the masculine side. They looked like students from the university." [10]

Heading this group of supposed mass murderers was Hani Hanjour, the alleged suicide pilot said to have crashed Flight 77 into the Pentagon. This 29-year-old from Saudi Arabia was "barely over 5 feet tall, skinny and boyish," according to the Washington Post. [11] Not only was he physically unimposing, he was also quite a nice man, according to several people who met him. In spring 1996, he'd stayed for a month in Miramar, Florida, in the home of Adnan Khalil, a Saudi professor at a local college, and his wife Susan. The Khalils have recalled Hanjour being "mousey and gentle, with a weak personality." Susan Khalil has commented, "I didn't get the feeling that he hated me or hated Americans." [12] He also liked children. Susan Khalil recalled, "He was very kind and gentle to my son, who was 3 years old." [13] Early in 2001, Hanjour attended the JetTech flight school in Phoenix, Arizona. [14] According to Marilyn Ladner, a vice president at the Pan Am International Flight Academy, which operated the school: "The staff thought he was a very nice guy. ... There was no suspicion as far as evildoing." [15] After 9/11, Abulrahman Hanjour, Hani's older brother, described the family's feelings: "We thought that he liked the USA. ... I would think he would give his life to save lives, not to do this." [16]

THE IMPOSSIBLE HIJACKING
Yet this apparently sweet and gentle little man, along with his four physically unimposing colleagues, are meant to have become a gang of killers on 9/11. Here, in the words of the 9/11 Commission, is what they are alleged to have done: "Between 8:51 a.m. and 8:54 a.m., the hijackers began their takeover of the aircraft. They initiated and sustained their command of the aircraft using knives and box cutters (reported by one passenger) and moved all of the passengers (and possibly crew) to the rear of the aircraft (reported by one flight attendant and one passenger)." However, "Neither of the firsthand accounts to come from Flight 77, from a flight attendant and from a passenger, mentioned any actual use of violence (e.g., stabbings) or the threat or use of either a bomb or Mace." [17] I guess we are supposed to believe the passengers and crew were so terrified by these puny little men that they just submitted to them without a fight.

Charles Burlingame and his co-pilot David Charlebois appear to have lost control of Flight 77 within the space of just a few minutes. At 8:54, three minutes after its last routine radio communication, the plane veered off its assigned course. Two minutes later, its transponder--a small radio transmitter that sends information about a plane to controllers--was switched off. [18] In other words, five short, weak men were supposedly able to seize control from Burlingame--a highly trained former military man who enjoyed weightlifting and was described as "really tough"--in about three minutes.

Although neither of the two alleged callers from Flight 77 mentioned any violence having occurred, Burlingame's younger brother Mark has commented: "I don't know what happened in that cockpit, but I'm sure that [the hijackers] would have had to incapacitate [Charles Burlingame] or kill him because he would have done anything to prevent the kind of tragedy that befell that airplane." [19] Burlingame's friend Timothy Keating remarked that "the terrorists had to perform some inhumane act to get him out of that cockpit, I guarantee you." [20] And indeed, according to Virginia Senator John Warner, "the examination of his remains ... indicated Captain Burlingame was in a struggle and died before the crash, doing his best to save lives on the aircraft and on the ground." [21] Former Senator George Allen said the FBI had determined that Burlingame was bludgeoned to death. [22]

This story is ridiculous. There is no way five weaklings could have seized control of Flight 77, in the process beating Charles Burlingame to death, all within a few minutes. The most crucial questions therefore remain uninvestigated and unanswered: Who really killed Charles Burlingame? And what actually happened that day?

NOTES
[1] "Arlington's Burial Regulations Anger Family of Hijacked Pilot." New York Times, December 5, 2001; "Arlington Plot Sought for Slain Pilot." Associated Press, December 6, 2001.
[2] Marcia C. Smith, "Man Will Toss out the First Pitch in His Brother's--and the Nation's--Honor." Orange County Register, March 29, 2002.
[3] Shawn Cohen, "Pilot's Death Leads to Sister's Crusade." Westchester Journal News, December 30, 2003.
[4] "Tony Snow's First Day as Press Secretary; Video Released of September 11 Plane Crashing into Pentagon." CNN, May 16, 2006.
[5] Megan O'Matz and Kathy Bushouse, "Reactions Across S. Florida: Agonizing Wait in Weston; Radio and Music Offer Comfort." South Florida Sun-Sentinel, September 14, 2001.
[6] "Staff Statement No. 16: Outline of the 9/11 Plot." 9/11 Commission, June 16, 2004.
[7] 9/11 Commission, 9/11 and Terrorist Travel: A Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. Franklin, TN: Hillsboro Press, 2004, pp. 191-192.
[8] Bradley Olson, "Md. Was Among Last Stops for Hijackers." Baltimore Sun, September 9, 2006.
[9] Thomas Frank, "Tracing Trail of Hijackers." Newsday, September 23, 2001.
[10] "The Banality of Evil." U.S. News & World Report, September 23, 2001.
[11] Amy Goldstein, Lena H. Sun, and George Lardner Jr., "Hanjour a Study in Paradox." Washington Post, October 15, 2001.
[12] Wes Allison, "The Terrorists Next Door." St. Petersburg Times, October 2, 2001.
[13] David Crary, "Baseball, Pizza and Porn: Hijackers Saw American Daily Life up Close." Associated Press, September 21, 2001.
[14] "FAA Was Alerted to Sept. 11 Hijacker." CBS News, May 10, 2002.
[15] Jim Yardley, "A Trainee Noted for Incompetence." New York Times, May 4, 2002.
[16] Amy Goldstein, Lena H. Sun, and George Lardner Jr., "Hanjour a Study in Paradox."
[17] "Staff Report, August 26, 2004." 9/11 Commission, August 26, 2004, p. 29.
[18] Ibid.
[19] "Remembering the Pentagon Victims: Charles Burlingame." Washington Post, undated.
[20] "Tony Snow's First Day as Press Secretary; Video Released of September 11 Plane Crashing Into Pentagon."
[21] Josh White, "An About-Face on Pilot's Burial." Washington Post, December 8, 2001.
[22] Josh White, "Lawmakers Seek Full Burial for Pilot." Washington Post, December 6, 2001.

"We're Next": Who Gave the Warning to "Stay off the E-Ring" of the Pentagon?

On September 11, 2001, NBC News Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski was the first reporter at the scene to relay that the Pentagon had been attacked. In a 9:39 a.m. report, he said, "[J]ust a few moments ago ... there was an explosion of some kind here at the Pentagon." After describing what he was seeing and hearing around him, Miklaszewski added: "[I]nterestingly enough, one intelligence official here in the building said [that] when he saw what appeared to be the coordinated attack on the World Trade Center, his advice was to stay away from the outside of the building today, just in case." [1]

Miklaszewski later described this incident again for a book. He recalled that, while heading down the hallway at the Pentagon, he'd "ran into a Defense official who said he didn't know anything specific about the attack yet. But it was so coordinated, he said, 'If I were you I would stay off the E-ring today, because we're next.'" According to Miklaszewski, this official "had no specific information; that was just his gut instinct." [2]

This raises serious questions. Firstly, who was this Defense Department intelligence official? Secondly, why did he think the Pentagon was going to be hit next? After the attacks in New York occurred, Paul Gonzalez, a supervisor in the Defense Intelligence Agency comptroller's office, had in fact reassured his colleagues that the Pentagon was "probably the safest building in the world." No steps were being taken to evacuate the building or alert its employees to any danger. [3] Yet the official that spoke to Miklaszewski thought it would be a target.

Most importantly, why did he specifically warn Miklaszewski to "stay off the E-ring," meaning the outermost of the five concentric rings that make up the Pentagon? Even if we believed that it really was just his gut feeling that the Pentagon would be a target, how could he have guessed the E-ring was at risk? As David Ray Griffin has pointed out: "Assuming that terrorists in control of a Boeing 757 would want to be certain of hitting [the Pentagon], why would they aim at one of the facades, which are only 80 feet high, when they could have simply dived into the roof, which covers 29 acres? More important, one would assume that they would have wanted to cause as much damage to the Pentagon and kill as many of its employees as possible, and these aims would also have made the roof the logical target." [4] So surely if someone had feared an attack on the Pentagon based solely on gut feeling, they would have been most afraid that the roof would be hit. The fact that this Defense Department official believed the E-ring was the likely target suggests he had some kind of specific foreknowledge, and not just a "gut instinct."

While the available evidence is far from conclusive, this indication of foreknowledge is one of the many things that ought to be looked into when there is a proper investigation of 9/11.

NOTES
[1] NBC News, September 11, 2001.
[2] Allison Gilbert et al. (Editors), Covering Catastrophe: Broadcast Journalists Report September 11. Chicago: Bonus Books, 2002, p. 43.
[3] Steve Vogel, "Survivors Healed, but Not Whole." Washington Post, March 11, 2002; Steve Vogel, The Pentagon: A History. New York: Random House, 2007, p. 429.
[4] David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11. Northampton, MA: Olive Branch Press, 2004, p. 40.

Ground Level Fireballs Disprove Official WTC Collapse Theories

As the two entries from the Complete 9/11 Timeline copied below show, several witnesses have recalled seeing large fireballs coming from the bases of each of the Twin Towers when they collapsed on September 11, 2001. From their descriptions, it seems the fireballs erupted at the time the collapses began, or just before.

These accounts are important evidence, strongly refuting official explanations of why the World Trade Center fell. In its final report on the collapses of the Twin Towers, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) claimed the collapses "initiated at the fire and impact floors," and "progressed from the initiating floors downward." This would mean the collapse began, in the case of the South Tower, around the 78th to 84th floors, and for the North Tower, around the 93rd to 98th floors.

Why would a collapse that started way up towards the top of each building coincide with, or be preceded by, a massive fireball erupting from the bottom? The official theory--that structural damage and fire caused the collapses--cannot explain this. Nor can it explain why, according to several witnesses, the ground started shaking just before the collapse of the South Tower, and again just before the collapse of the North Tower.

The ground level fireballs make sense, however, when we consider what Mark Loizeaux--the president of Controlled Demolition Inc.--has said: "If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse the structure."


Shortly Before 9:59 a.m. September 11, 2001: Some Witnesses See Ground-Level Explosion Just Before WTC 2 Collapses
Some witnesses reportedly see a massive fireball at ground level, coming from the South Tower just before it starts to collapse. According to a report by the Mineta Transportation Institute (a research institute founded by Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta), "People inside the South Tower felt the floor vibrate as if a small earthquake were occurring.… The vibration lasted for about 30 seconds. The doors were knocked out, and a huge ball of flame created by the exploding diesel fuel from the building's own supply tank shot from the elevator shaft and out the doors of the South Tower, consuming everything in its path. Minutes later, at 9:59 a.m., the tower collapsed." [Jenkins and Edwards-Winslow, 9/2003, pp. 16] Around the same time, Port Authority Police Officer Will Jimeno is in a corridor leading toward the North Tower. "Suddenly the hallway began to shudder," and he sees "the giant fireball explode in the street," when the South Tower begins to collapse. [Bowhunter, 1/2003] Ronald DiFrancesco is the last person to make it out of the South Tower before it collapses. As he is heading toward the exit that leads onto Church Street, he hears a loud roar as the collapse begins. According to the Ottawa Citizen, "Mr. DiFrancesco turned to his right in the direction of Liberty Street, to see a massive fireball—compressed as the South Tower fell—roiling toward [him]." He bolts for the exit, before being knocked unconscious and blown many yards across the street. [USA Today, 12/18/2001; Ottawa Citizen, 6/4/2005; Ottawa Citizen, 6/5/2005; PBS NOVA, 9/5/2006] A number of other witnesses report feeling the ground shaking just seconds before the South Tower collapses (see Shortly Before 9:59 a.m. September 11, 2001).
Source

10:28 a.m. September 11, 2001: Reporter Sees Ground-Level Explosion When North Tower Collapses
CBS News correspondent Carol Marin witnesses what she describes as a "gigantic fireball" coming from the base of the North Tower as it starts to collapse. [USA Today, 9/11/2001; Chicago Sun-Times, 9/12/2001; Daily Herald (Arlington Heights), 9/11/2002] Marin headed to the scene of the attacks and arrived on West Street after the South Tower collapsed. She then sees the second tower come down, later describing, "I was only a block or two away from the North Tower when the street trembled under my feet, a fireball of pooled jet fuel exploded out of the building's base, and it too, unbelievably, started to collapse right in front of me." [Chicago Sun-Times, 9/10/2006] (However, the explosion could not be due to "pooled jet fuel," as, according to the National Institute of Standards and Technology, "The jet fuel" from the planes "was mostly consumed within the first few minutes after impact." [National Institute of Standards and Technology, 6/18/2004; New York Times, 4/5/2005]) In one telling, Marin describes, "a roar seemed to come out of the earth," causing the fireball. [Gilbert et al., 2002] In another, she says, "there was a roar, an explosion, and we could see coming toward us a ball of flame, stories high." She runs, and a firefighter throws her against a building to protect her. She recalls, "The flame somehow stopped short of us." [CBS News, 2002, pp. 54] Other witnesses also describe the ground shaking before the North Tower collapse (see Shortly Before 10:28 a.m. September 11, 2001). And some witnesses similarly report seeing a fireball at ground level coming from the South Tower when it collapsed (see Shortly Before 9:59 a.m. September 11, 2001).
Source

The Breakdown of the FBI Anti-Terror Team on 9/11

A brief but important NBC News report broadcast during the morning of 9/11 indicated how the FBI was rendered useless in its ability to respond to the kind of attacks that were taking place. Shortly after 10:00 a.m., correspondent Andrea Mitchell reported: "This very interesting information ... from the FBI: They have been operating a massive exercise from their hostage rescue unit. All of their top teams, about 50 personnel, helicopters, equipment, were in Monterey, California for the last two days, scheduled to fly back today commercially. So all of those people are out of place." She continued: "You've got all of their special experts on this stuck in Monterey, California, trying to get a military flight back because there are no longer commercial flights. So they are seriously out of pocket, and there is a real breakdown of the FBI anti-terror coordination team, which is of course the principal team that would lead any effort, and was so effective under Jim Kallstrom in New York City during the World Trade Center bombing and the TWA [Flight 800] explosion."

Despite the implications of this incredible information, only one newspaper covered it. In a report published that same day, USA Today briefly described: "The attack was so unexpected that a joint FBI/CIA anti-terrorist task force that specifically prepared for this type of disaster was on a training exercise in Monterey, Calif." The politics website Evote.com also mentioned the incident, concluding: "just as the worst terrorist act was being committed on American lives and property, the chief federal agency responsible for preventing such crimes was being AWOL." But, in the six years since, this information has been ignored, and no mention was made of it in the 9/11 Commission Report.

If the official theory about 9/11 is correct, and the attacks were indeed perpetrated by Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, then the absence of the FBI's antiterrorist experts at the one time they were most needed must be a freak coincidence. However, if the official theory is wrong, then this could have been part of a deliberate attempt to 'stand down' normal lines of defense, so as to ensure that the attacks succeeded.

In her report, Mitchell also stated: "It's fair to say, according to sources that we've talked to here at NBC, that the FBI rescue operations and other FBI operations are really in chaos right now, because they can't reach their officials in New York, all of their phone lines are down." I have previously described evidence that communications may have been deliberately sabotaged on 9/11, particularly in the Washington, DC area. Key individuals, including government officials and members of the military, appear to have been affected. So when we hear a report about the FBI on 9/11, stating, "all of their phone lines are down," we must surely also wonder whether this was due to sabotage. A proper investigation of the 9/11 attacks is urgently needed to establish the truth.

"A Great Opportunity": President Bush Describes 9/11

How did President Bush feel about the September 11 attacks? In the following hours, weeks, and months, he repeatedly used one word. While most people no doubt felt that it was an absolute catastrophe, George W. Bush described 9/11--or at least the political climate it had engendered--as an "opportunity." He said this again and again:

September 11, 2001
Hours after the attacks, during a 9:30 p.m. meeting with his key advisers, Bush declared: "This is a great opportunity. We have to think of this as an opportunity." [1]

Later that evening, he dictated for his diary: "My hope is that this will provide an opportunity for us to rally the world against terrorism." [2]

September 13, 2001
During an appearance in the White House Oval Office, Bush said: "You know, through the tears of sadness I see an opportunity. ... And now is an opportunity to do generations a favor, by coming together and whipping terrorism." [3]

During the National Security Council meeting later that day, he said: "This is a new world. ... Start the clock. This is an opportunity. ... I want Afghan options ... I want decisions quick." [4]

September 19, 2001
During a photo opportunity at the White House, the president described: "Progress is being made. ... I said at the time, through my tears I see opportunity. One of the opportunities I saw was the ability not to put--not only for freedom-loving nations to come together to say resolutely we will fight terrorism, but I felt like there would be--this event may shake up the attitudes of the Middle East where people would end up resolving to show the world that there could be peace there as well." [5]

During another photo opportunity later in the day, he said: "Let me say that, in terms of foreign policy and in terms of the world, this horrible tragedy has provided us with an interesting opportunity. One of the opportunities is in the Middle East. ... I think there's some interesting opportunities to shake terrorism loose from sponsor states. And this government, working with Congress, are going to seize the moment." [6]

October 3, 2001
Bush told a meeting of business leaders in New York: "There's now a reassessment taking place all over America. ... [P]eople are reassessing: what can I do to help? I truly believe that out of this will come greater opportunities for peace; peace in the Middle East. This is a fantastic opportunity born out of sadness, and the question is--can we seize it?" [7]

October 21, 2001
During a press conference along with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Bush said: "Both of us see great opportunity. Both of us see positive good that has come out of the evil of September the 11th. Both of us are willing to work hard to seize the moment." [8]

October 29, 2001
Addressing the African Growth and Opportunity Forum, the president said: "Out of the sorrow of September 11th, I see opportunity, a chance for nations to strengthen and rethink and reinvigorate their relationships." [9]

January 29, 2002
During his State of the Union address, the president said: "In the sacrifice of soldiers, the fierce brotherhood of firefighters, and the bravery and generosity of ordinary citizens, we have glimpsed what a new culture of responsibility could look like. ... We've been offered a unique opportunity, and we must not let this moment pass. ... This time of adversity offers a unique moment of opportunity--a moment we must seize to change our culture. ... And we have a great opportunity during this time of war to lead the world toward the values that will bring lasting peace. ... In this moment of opportunity, a common danger is erasing old rivalries." [10]

July 19, 2002
Bush told journalist Bill Sammon that "the events of September 11 caused him to focus on two big goals that he believed the nation could achieve." One of these, the president said, was "peace. ... I believe we can achieve the peace in the Middle East. And I believe we can achieve a peace in South Asia. ... I view this as an opportunity that we will seize." And at home, he added: "the cultural shift toward personal responsibility is going to enable us to better deal with those who could be left behind. ... And one of my jobs is to seize this opportunity, to encourage its impact on our culture." [11]

It would appear that the president's feelings were similar to those articulated by a senior Pentagon official. In 2004, this unnamed official told Washington Times reporter Rowan Scarborough: "I hate to say this and would never say this in public, but 9/11 had its benefits." [12]

NOTES
[1] Bob Woodward, Bush at War. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002, pp. 31-32.
[2] Dan Balz and Bob Woodward, "America's Chaotic Road to War." Washington Post, January 27, 2002.
[3] "President Pledges Assistance for New York in Phone Call With Pataki, Giuliani." White House, September 13, 2001; Elisabeth Bumiller and Jane Perlez, "The Overview; Bush and Top Aides Proclaim Policy of 'Ending' States That Back Terror; Local Airports Shut After an Arrest." New York Times, September 14, 2001.
[4] Dan Balz, Bob Woodward and Jeff Himmelman, "Afghan Campaign's Blueprint Emerges." Washington Post, January 29, 2002.
[5] "President Building Worldwide Campaign Against Terrorism." White House, September 19, 2001.
[6] "Remarks by the President at Photo Opportunity With House and Senate Leadership." White House, September 19, 2001.
[7] Karen Hughes, Ten Minutes From Normal. New York: Viking, 2004, pp. 267-268.
[8] "President Bush and Russian President Putin Discuss Progress." White House, October 21, 2001.
[9] "U.S., Africa Strengthen Counter-Terrorism and Economic Ties." White House, October 29, 2001.
[10] "President Delivers State of the Union Address." White House, January 29, 2002.
[11] Bill Sammon, Fighting Back: The War on Terrorism--From Inside the Bush White House. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2002, pp. 382-383.
[12] Rowan Scarborough, Rumsfeld's War: The Untold Story of America's Anti-Terrorist Commander. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2004, pp. iii.

Todd Beamer's Odd Phone Call and the Silent Crash of Flight 93

A key element of the official 9/11 story is the phone call Todd Beamer made from United Airlines Flight 93 shortly before it supposedly crashed in rural Pennsylvania. It was at the end of this call that Beamer was heard declaring: "Let's roll," before joining a passenger revolt against the terrorists. Without this now-famous call to battle, 9/11 would arguably have been less effective in motivating the public to get behind the war on terror. By May 2002, the Washington Post reported, Beamer's phrase "Let's roll" had been "Embraced and promoted by President Bush as a patriotic battle cry," and was "now emblazoned on Air Force fighter planes, city firetrucks, school athletic jerseys, and countless T-shirts, baseball caps and souvenir buttons. It's also commemorated in popular songs." [1] The London Evening Standard called Beamer's final words "a symbol of America's determination to fight back." [2] Rowland Morgan, author of the book Flight 93 Revealed, concluded: "Truly, the Let's Roll slogan had become a call to arms--just at a time the White House needed it most." [3] Yet, an examination of Todd Beamer's phone call reveals numerous oddities, coincidences, and seeming impossibilities.

THE ODD PHONE CALL
For 13 minutes, Beamer had spoken with Lisa Jefferson, a customer service supervisor at GTE Airfone's Chicago call center. He explained to her that his plane had been hijacked, and, assisted by a flight attendant sitting next to him, provided details about the flight. He also talked about his pregnant wife and two young sons. Being a devout Christian, he asked Jefferson to recite the Lord's Prayer with him, and then recited the 23rd Psalm. Before declaring his famous last words, Beamer said some of the passengers were going to try and seize control of the plane. At around 9:58 a.m., he put the phone down and was heard saying to someone else: "You ready? OK. Let's roll." [4]

The first thing that was odd about this call is the simple fact that Beamer was able to talk to Jefferson continuously for 13 minutes. In her 2002 book, his wife Lisa Beamer revealed that Jefferson had informed her "it was a miracle that Todd's call hadn't been disconnected." The reason: "Because of the enormous number of calls that day, the GTE systems overloaded and lines were being disconnected all around her as she sat at the operator's station outside of Chicago, talking to Todd. [Jefferson] kept thinking, This call is going to get dropped! Yet Todd stayed connected ... all the way to the end." [5] Very fortunate indeed this was, because if the call had become disconnected there would have been no "Let's roll" slogan for the war on terror.

A further oddity was Todd Beamer's remarkable calmness, despite the catastrophic situation he was in. Jefferson recalled: "Todd, when he came to me, he was calm. ... [H]e stayed calm through the entire conversation." [6] In her 2006 book, Called, Jefferson wrote: "[H]is voice was devoid of any stress. In fact, he sounded so tranquil it made me begin to doubt the authenticity and urgency of his call." [7] She told Beamer's wife: "If I hadn't known it was a real hijacking, I'd have thought it was a crank call, because Todd was so rational and methodical about what he was doing." [8]

WHY DIDN'T BEAMER TALK TO HIS WIFE?
At some point during the call, Beamer said he did not think he was going to survive, telling Jefferson: "I know we're not going to make it out of here." [9] He gave her his home phone number and said: "If I don't make it out of this, would you please call my family and let them know how much I love them?" [10] Yet he refused offers to be put through to his wife. Jefferson has recalled: "I asked if he wanted to be connected to his wife." But, "he said no, that he did not want to upset her as they were expecting their third child in January." [11]

However, before reaching the call center, Todd Beamer had supposedly been trying to call his wife, but was simply unable to get through. [12] According to a summary of passenger phone calls presented at the 2006 trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, Beamer tried making this call just before 9:44 a.m., but it had been "terminated upon connection." [13] His wife has recalled that she heard her phone ring twice before stopping, and then, moments later, ringing once more. She said: "When I picked it up, it was dead air. I feel fairly confident that it was Todd. It would be on his mind to call me, to protect me." [14] According to some accounts, he reached the call center because his call was automatically routed there when his attempt at reaching his wife failed. [15] (However, other accounts claim he'd reached it by dialing "0" on the Airfone. [16])

The question remains: If Todd Beamer really did not want to talk to his wife because she was pregnant and he was afraid he might upset her, why had be been trying to phone her in the first place? Even if we somehow accept that he'd changed his mind over the space of a few minutes, another question arises: Why had Beamer not instead asked Jefferson to try and put him through to his parents, or one of his sisters, or another relative, or a friend? Instead, he'd apparently been content to talk with a stranger, explaining to Jefferson: "I just want to talk to somebody and just let someone know that this is happening." [17]

THE SILENT CRASH OF FLIGHT 93
Perhaps the oddest aspect of the call is what happened after 9:58, when Todd Beamer put the phone down to join the passenger revolt against the hijackers. Jefferson has recalled: "After he said, 'Let's roll,' he left the phone, and I would assume that's at the point that they went to charge the cockpit. And I was still on the line and the plane took a dive, and by then, it just went silent. I held on until after the plane crashed--probably about 15 minutes longer and I never heard a crash--it just went silent because--I can't explain it. We didn't lose a connection because there's a different sound that you use. It's a squealing sound when you lose a connection. I never lost connection, but it just went silent." [18]

Now how is this possible? Firstly, how could the call have remained connected after the plane crashed? According to the summary of passenger phone calls presented at the Moussaoui trial, Beamer's call lasted "3,925 seconds." [19] This would mean it did not end until 10:49 a.m., about three-quarters of an hour after Flight 93 supposedly crashed. And, secondly, how could there have been silence when the crash occurred?

WAS BEAMER'S CALL RECORDED?
Considering that Todd Beamer's call is central to the official 9/11 narrative, it would be helpful if a recording of it were available to be properly analyzed. However, all that supposedly exists is a summary written by Jefferson. According to journalist and author Jere Longman: "GTE-Verizon did not routinely tape its telephone calls. As a supervisor, [Jefferson] would have been the one to monitor the taping, but she did not want to risk losing the call." [20] In her own book, Jefferson claimed she had "not had a chance to press the switch in my office that initiates the taping of a conversation." [21] Rowland Morgan has pointed out that this means the evidence of Beamer's call is "single-sourced, unsubstantiated hearsay of which there was no record. ... [Jefferson] had no idea what Beamer's voice sounded like, and she would never hear it again to judge whether he had actually been speaking to her." [22] However, a week after 9/11 the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette had claimed otherwise, stating that, "because it was to an operator," the call "was tape-recorded." [23] If a recording of the call indeed exists, it has been kept well hidden.

Todd Beamer's call in fact only came to light five days after the attacks, in a report in the Post-Gazette. [24] Beamer's wife first learned of it three days after the attacks, in a phone call from United Airlines. Until then, the FBI had been keeping the information private until it had an opportunity to review it. (Yet how long does it take to review a written summary of a 13-minute phone call?) [25] An FBI agent had phoned Lisa Jefferson on the afternoon of 9/11. She recalled: "I was told to maintain secrecy. In fact, he stressed the importance of keeping the matter under wraps." [26] But why? What was there to hide?

THE SHAKY FOUNDATION OF THE WAR ON TERROR
Clearly, many things seem odd about Todd Beamer's phone call. For now, it is really up to each of us to decide what we think was going on. But it should concern us all that the war on terror is founded upon such dubious evidence. This war, after all, has caused the deaths of thousands of Americans, tens of thousands of Afghans, and over a million Iraqis. It's time to go back and properly investigate the event that started it all.

NOTES
[1] Peter Perl, "Hallowed Ground." Washington Post, May 12, 2002.
[2] James Langton, "Pain and Joy of 11." Evening Standard, August 19, 2002.
[3] Rowland Morgan, "Flight 93 'Was Shot Down' Claims Book." Daily Mail, August 18, 2006.
[4] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes: United Flight 93 and the Passengers and Crew Who Fought Back. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002, pp. 198-200 and 203-204; Wes Smith, "Operator Can't Forget Haunting Cries From Flight 93." Orlando Sentinel, September 5, 2002.
[5] Lisa Beamer and Ken Abraham, Let's Roll!: Ordinary People, Extraordinary Courage. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2002, p. 217.
[6] Wendy Schuman, "'I Promised I Wouldn't Hang Up.'" Beliefnet, 2006.
[7] Lisa Jefferson and Felicia Middlebrooks, Called. Chicago: Northfield Publishing, 2006, p. 33.
[8] Lisa Beamer and Ken Abraham, Let's Roll! p. 211.
[9] Douglas Holt, "Call Records Detail How Passengers Foiled 2nd Washington Attack." Chicago Tribune, September 16, 2001.
[10] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, p. 200.
[11] Wes Smith, "Operator Can't Forget Haunting Cries From Flight 93."
[12] U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, "Stipulation [Regarding Flights Hijacked on September 11, 2001; September 11, 2001 Deaths; al Qaeda; Chronology of Hijackers' Activities; Zacarias Moussaoui; and the Computer Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System (CAPPS)]." March 1, 2006, p. 11.
[13] U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, "Summary From Flight 93 Depicting: The Identity of Pilots and Flight Attendants, Seat Assignments of Passengers, and Telephone Calls From the Flight." July 31, 2006.
[14] Jaxon Van Derbeken, "Bound by Fate, Determination: The Final Hours of the Passengers Aboard SF-Bound Flight 93." San Francisco Chronicle, September 17, 2001.
[15] Karen Breslau, "The Final Moments of United Flight 93." Newsweek, September 22, 2001; Dennis B. Roddy, "Flight 93: Forty Lives, One Destiny." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, October 28, 2001; Glen Johnson, "Probe Reconstructs Horror, Calculated Attacks on Planes." Boston Globe, November 23, 2001; U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, March 1, 2006, p. 11.
[16] Jim McKinnon, "GTE Operator Connects With, Uplifts Widow of Hero in Hijacking." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 19, 2001; Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, pp. 198-199; Wes Smith, "Operator Can't Forget Haunting Cries From Flight 93."
[17] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, p. 204.
[18] Wendy Schuman, "'I Promised I Wouldn't Hang Up.'"
[19] U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, July 31, 2006.
[20] Jere Longman, Among the Heroes, p. 199.
[21] Lisa Jefferson and Felicia Middlebrooks, Called, p. 36.
[22] Rowland Morgan, "Flight 93 'Was Shot Down' Claims Book."
[23] Jim McKinnon, "GTE Operator Connects With, Uplifts Widow of Hero in Hijacking."
[24] Jim McKinnon, "The Phone Line From Flight 93 Was Still Open When a GTE Operator Heard Todd Beamer Say: 'Are You Guys Ready? Let's Roll.'" Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 16, 2001.
[25] Lisa Beamer and Ken Abraham, Let's Roll! pp. 185-186.
[26] Lisa Jefferson and Felicia Middlebrooks, Called, p. 69.