The Twin Towers Set 9/11's Epistemological Question
Do you know that the U.S. government hid—rather clumsily—Building 7’s controlled demolition? Are you aware of the global and enduring censorship imposed by the mass media on this cover-up? Would you like to probe it deeper? If so, read on. If not, consider finding reasons to come back here, perhaps by visiting this web’s Building 7 page.
As much as the controlled demolition of a high-rise, even as large as Building 7, does not deserve much worry, its cover-up by the U.S. government is very disturbing. Since this cover-up has been sloppy by any standard, its ensuing de facto near-absolute censorship by the mass media is outright alarming.
There are many ways to tackle this epistemological plot, the most straightforward of which is to review an event similar in place, time and magnitude to Building 7’s demolition but dramatically different for its highly emotional connotation: the twin towers’ structural failure. This exercise is best left to the de facto authority on the twin towers, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth). It so happens that AE911Truth has established that the twin towers, like Building 7, were destroyed by controlled demolitions, with two notable technical deviations from the regular process:
the demolitions were explosive, versus implosive in the case of Building 7; they violently projected members of the steel frame away from the twin towers
they started high in the towers, near the sites of the earlier terror attacks (allegedly by large hijacked jets), versus at the base in the case of Building 7.
Behold the synthetic diagram of their analysis:
For a comprehensive demonstration, kindly explore AE911Truth’s slide show or comparable materials. Within the scope of this web page, suffice to notice the use of a well-honed version of the scientific method:
AE911Truth formulates the hypothesis that the twin towers were demolished
AE911Truth looks for and lists expected symptoms of this hypothesis should it be true, starting with “if the twin towers were demolished, then their destruction would have started suddenly and at the level of the earlier terror attacks”
AE911Truth turns these expected symptoms into possible reasons to doubt the hypothesis, starting with “if we find that the twin towers’ destruction did not start suddenly or did not start at the level of the earlier terror attacks, then we shall affirm this as a reason to doubt the twin towers’ controlled demolition”
AE911Truth explores in turn each of these possible reasons to doubt the twin towers’ demolition
AE911Truth finds that none of these reasons can be supported, starting with “we do not find that the twin towers’ destruction did not start suddenly or did not start at the level of the earlier terror attacks, therefore we clear this particular reason to doubt their demolition”
note that AE911Truth’s findings happen to exceed the minimal requirements to clear these reasons, starting with “we happen to go further than failing to find that the twin towers’ destruction did not start suddenly or did not start at the level of the earlier terror attacks, we actually find reasons to believe that it did start suddenly and at the level of the earlier terror attacks”
the discussion of these reasons happens to indirectly demonstrate the physical impossibility of the official “destruction by office fires ignited by aircraft fuel” theory and the fraudulent nature of the final official technical report that affirms it
since none of the possible reasons to doubt the demolition theory can be sustained and since the official “fire” theory is to be rejected, AE911Truth concludes that the twin towers’ demolition shall be accepted as a fact until contradicted by new convincing information
The results of AE911Truth’s exploration of the twin towers’ destruction can be fairly summarized as follows:
on 9-11, in the World Trade Center, the twin towers experienced structural failures
these structural failures were sudden, total, catastrophic, and disintegrative
they were due to a dual well executed controlled demolition
this controlled demolition deviated from standard demolitions by being explosive and starting at the level of earlier terror attacks
the U.S. government investigated this event from a technical standpoint
this investigation was a fraud and a cover-up
there has been a global conspiracy to censor this
They immediately vindicate 9/11 Truth:
the twin towers’ destruction was, by far, 9/11’s defining event
the official 9/11 explanation for the twin towers’ destruction is a fraud
consequently, the official 9/11 narrative is essentially a fraud
They lead to paradigm-shifting conclusions in the areas of global terrorism and counterterrorism:
the twin towers’ structural failures were 9/11’s flagship event, with cameras rolling, thousands of civilians inside, shock and awe
the demolitions of the twin towers were definitely the work of terrorists: they were deliberate, they were unexpected, and they killed many people
the demolitions of the twin towers are the most formidable terror attacks in history: they were morbidly spectacular, they wielded much death and destruction, and they generated great fear worldwide
the authors of the demolitions of the twin towers are the most formidable terrorists in history
the U.S. government gave cover and protection to the most formidable terrorists in history
the U.S. government’s solemn commitment to fight terror is a grand lie
But the juiciest conclusions, like on Building 7, are epistemological:
the demonstration of the twin towers’ demolition, although it is best presented by architects and engineers, is so simple that even people with an average intelligence can sustain it
therefore, numerous leaders and organizations (watchdogs) that ostensibly constantly look for any U.S. faux pas and fight tooth and nail policies inspired by 9/11 could have dug AE911Truth’s information, drawn AE911Truth’s conclusions, and brought these conclusions to the public’s attention
had they done so, they could have slain the proverbial dragon and nullified the many 9/11-induced policies that they claim to oppose
however, none of these watchdogs did so, perhaps not even those dearest to you
even in 2011, with the above widely known, the watchdogs still largely ignore—at best—9/11 Truth
this brings us to 9/11’s fundamental teaching: the global and enduring censorship of the cover and protection the U.S. government granted the most formidable terrorists in history
This leads us to your next 9/11 action item:
list your sources of information: TV channels, government agencies, religious outfits, non-profit organizations, your employer, etc.
evaluate whether they should but did not properly report on 9/11
politely engage those who did not; ask them why they failed to inform you and others of 9/11’s true nature; if you’d like, forward them a link to this web (or another 9/11 resource) and invite them to respond to the accusations it formulates against them; consider sending them money at the same time so as to prod them for an answer
conclude that they could be active participants in the 9/11 censorship
accordingly reevaluate your confidence in the information they provide
look for sources of information that have duly reported on the cover and protection the U.S. government granted the most formidable terrorists ever
review these alternative sources of information and accordingly give them more credibility
AE911Truth’s analysis of the twin towers’ explosive demolitions provides important information. However, it does not put to rest the epistemological plot that Building 7’s censorship exposed. Au contraire, it expands it into the baffling question as to how literally tens of thousands of watchdogs of very different types all over the world would somehow conspire to censor the cover and protection the U.S. government granted the most formidable terrorists in history.
This is precisely the fundamental teaching of 9/11: the morbidly spectacular controlled demolitions of the twin towers have served as the pretext for many nefarious activities, first among them an open-ended war, they and their cover-up are evident, yet no watchdog of importance has voiced concern over this. This hints at a censorship of gargantuan proportions:
it is amazingly resilient
it cuts across traditional intra-human boundaries: geographic, religious, economic, political, linguistic, etc.
it implicates organizations whose vested interests or stated missions would have them vociferously denounce the fraud of 9/11
it is evil, as it has allowed the 9/11 conspirators to impose a decade of worldwide misery and promises another one
As such, the specifics of 9/11 matter much less than the mind-boggling epistemological questions they raise:
how has the 9/11 censorship been coordinated?
how was it designed under the nose of “us the people of the world?”
has it been used to cover other grand conspiracies against humanity?
has it been used to cover smaller conspiracies also?
what processes does it use to prevent and fix leaks?
can “we” gather information about it?
can “we” find its root cause?
would the knowledge of its root cause and an understanding of its processes be of some use to “us?”
could this knowledge provide “us” with a highly beneficial global paradigm shift commensurate with the immense evil 9/11 has inflicted on “us?"
if so, what would “our” best course of action be?
The discerning reader will concur that it is hard to think of more important questions than these. They turn 9/11 Truth into an overarching call to relentless investigation.
There are many paths to apprehend the ultimate ramifications of the 9/11 censorship, the most direct and pragmatic one being arguably found in the free Global Platonic Theater e-book.
Love,
Dan Noël, 2011-3-19