2011:  It Can’t and It Didn’t 9-11
 design fashion film music art photography global notes life
    It was no different when Robert McNamara admitted that he had completely made up the story that the Vietnamese had attacked the United States war boats in the Bay of Tonkin, which was the rationale that we used to go to war with Vietnam. It was barely a footnote on the evening news. But it is not a footnote to the Vietnamese, who lost over three million people, and who were regarded as nothing more than collateral damage in the path of profits for American weapons manufacturers. 

    The major media corporations are in lockstep with profit motive and the messages that maximize market share, without being held accountable to what they know to be true. Fox News is the obvious example of this, but even though MSNBC puts itself up to being the alternative to Fox, we must not forget that NBC is owned by General Electric and General Electric makes most of its money through government contracts. They will not say anything to put those contracts at risk. In fact most news organizations, MSNBC included, are far worse than dismissive to any efforts to look into the events of September 11th, they use their full force to marginalize anyone who questions the dubious conclusion that planes brought down the Towers.

    One must be clear here. Popular opinion does not constitute evidence. Physical objects, chemical analysis of dust, and multiple video angles of an event constitute evidence. Simply likening people who encourage further investigation into 9-11 to people who deny the moon landing, Obama's birth documents, and people who deny the holocaust is nothing more than pathetic name calling and an impotent diversion away from facts. But some poll numbers suggest that interest in a new 9-11 investigation is not marginal at all. In an independent Siena Research Institute poll, 48 percent of New Yorkers support this effort, and a Zogby poll found that 45 percent of all Americans want to have the investigation reopened.

    These are genuine patriots, those who are willing to shine a critical light on our shortcomings in an effort to steer us back to a course of credibility and accountability. Yet the term ‘patriot’ has been co-opted by those who equate patriotism with blind unquestioning obedience. There is a certain proportion of the population who will fall for anything if you wrap a flag around it and loosely throw around terms like God, honor, and family. Some have been fed their flag-wrapped excrement for so long that they actually acquire a taste for it and will willingly vote against their own interest and the common good because they will not see what lies behind the symbols used against them.

    The disheartening outcome of uncovering the truth of the September 11th tragedy for the mainstream is that it will likely not elicit any more of a response than "Did you see the Cowboys game?" But this apathy, arrogance, and hubris does not escape the attention of the rest of the world. We cannot always count on being the world empire, or the largest economy, or the largest military. And even with these things, can we as a society, afford to set aside our own accountability within the world community?

    If we are to honestly wear the mantle of a just democracy, we must demand of ourselves a level of attention and cold analysis of plain facts to guide our actions. But what we see now is a voracious push to set aside even the most basic central laws of science and physics to swallow what we are being told. 

    So, when the 9-11 rallies inevitably seek to incite anger and play up how we have been victimized, let us try to calmly hold to our sense of reason and not simply accept the first scapegoat we are presented with. The demeanor of truth is that it does not fear the light of attention or become angered by questions, and then resort to name calling. Those who do usually have an agenda to hide.

Oil Reserves in Iraq


Stephen Barasch Architect Transamerica Pyramid

Tom Sullivan Demolition Expert

Zogby Poll All Americans

Siena Poll New Yorkers

Cost of War

Percent of Oil Used

War Casualties Vietnam
It Can’t and It Didn’t 9-11

It Can’t and It Didn’t 9-11, September 2011 Vhcle Magazine Issue 7, Life     An object in motion will remain in motion until another force is applied to it. That is Newton's First Law of Motion, or simply the ‘Law of Inertia’. It has been well understood for over 300 years, it is broadly recognized in common culture, and there has never been any observed exception to it. That is why it is given the distinction of being a natural law. And though the Law of Inertia can be understood metaphorically, I am, in this case, speaking literally about the physical world, about mass, velocity, and force.

    We have arrived at the tenth anniversary of the attacks of September 11, 2001. It is an emotional time that triggers both sorrow and anger. The personal losses that people have suffered and continue to suffer must never fade from our attention when the matter is considered. But neither should we be so incensed by our emotions that reason is left behind.

    And so, we are confronted with an irrefutable observation. The Twin Towers fell at nearly free-fall speed. The problem with that is that it contradicts the idea that the buildings experienced a compression or ‘pancake’ collapse where the upper floors crushed the lower floors. Free-fall speed definitively shows that airplanes were not the sole cause that brought down the Towers. I have very little patience for conspiracy theories, but I steadfastly hold on to the immutability of the laws of physics and gravity.

    The proof is this: the top of the building cannot fall as though the bottom of the building was not there. In other words, the Law of Inertia as it applies to the bottom floors collapsing is that their mass provides resistance to the mass above it, which will unerringly slow down the acceleration of gravity. An example would be a car driving sixty miles an hour hitting an unmoving car, the moving car will automatically slow down upon impact. The only way that it can maintain its speed is if another force is acting on the still car to move it out of the way when the moving car passes by. Another example would be a bowling ball dropped through tiers of plywood or even cardboard. It is clearly understood that the bowling ball cannot hit the ground at the same speed that it would if the plywood wasn't there.

    And yet that is exactly what we are asked to believe in the collapse of the Twin Towers. But it was not plywood and cardboard holding up that building, it was structural steel and concrete designed to support the massive load of the building above. The resistance it provided was considerable and would have been significantly measurable as the building fell to the ground.

    The blunt fact is that is not what happened. We are left with one alternative. The supporting structures of the Twin Towers were ostensibly being severed during the collapse as the only possibility to account for free fall speed. The only other alternative is to suggest a gravitational anomaly that somehow appeared at the site temporarily during the collapse and then went away, which is as insane as denying the constancy of the laws of physics.

    When internet blogs speculate about government or domestic terrorist conspiracies, I can chuckle. But when a group of over 1,500 architects and engineers sign a petition to reinvestigate the causes of the Twin Towers' collapse because the official report is grossly inconsistent with the facts, then I become seriously concerned (see Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth: ae911truth.org). Here is a group of highly educated, skilled professionals whose livelihood and reputations can be seriously affected by publicly taking this stand. But they have the courage to take that risk because the truth of this matter is critical to the credibility of this nation.

    Stephen Barasch, AIA (American Institute of Architects), one of the architects of the Transamerica Pyramid in San Francisco, stated in regard to the official NIST version of the collapse: "The way it collapsed does not compute for an unplanned demolition." Demolition expert Tom Sullivan, (who worked on imploding Three Rivers Stadium, the Seattle Kingdome, and the Philadelphia Naval Hospital) and his company CDI is widely recognized in his field as one of the best, flatly spoke: "What I saw was a classic implosion [controlled demolition]." Statements like these by leading experts carry a great deal of credibility and persuasion, but not as much as the incontrovertible laws of motion and direct observation of the videotaped event we have all witnessed a hundred times. In other words, the response to the conjecture that there was a compression collapse that achieved free fall speed is: "It can't and it didn't."

    If the principles of physics are to be believed, then we are obliged to ask who has benefited from this tragedy? To suggest oil companies is short-sighted. Geologists estimate that there was only 115 billion barrels of oil in Iraq at the start of the war, and yet we have spent 3.7 trillion dollars up to this point on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that resulted from the events of 9-11, according to a study by Brown University. Obviously, this exceeds the value of the oil. Government contracts to military suppliers make up the vast majority of that money. The likes of Black Water and Dick Cheney's Haliburton corporation are two examples of the kinds of businesses that have amassed billions and billions of dollars on the backs of the American taxpayers under the false pretenses that manufactured support for the war.

    Is the American public so abysmally uneducated that clear evidence of deceit escapes their attention? Partly, yes. But it would be more accurate to suggest that people believe what they want to believe, especially when it comes to matters of nationalism and religion. Reason holds little influence in this realm. We would like to think that our beliefs dictate our behaviors, but unfortunately, it is more common that our behaviors dictate our beliefs.

    To put it another way, if we want to continue using twenty five percent of the world's oil supply, and ‘they’ have it, then we believe that ‘they’ attacked us so that we are justified in taking the oil from them. We choose to look no further. In fact, even when it was finally acknowledged that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and that the rumors of the weapons of mass destruction were shown to be pure and deliberate fabrication, we did not react with outrage at being deceived. We simply plodded onward asking only, "Hey, what was the score in the Yankees game?" falling prey to our own (to repeat the phrase) weapons of mass distraction.

[join our email list]
life design music photography home us film art fashion global notes archive links
Tim Sunderman is a Graphic Designer in the San Francisco Bay Area whose first love is drawing and painting, tries to avoid computers until there is no other recourse, and because there is no other recourse, yearns for the open spaces. Tim is a graduate from the Academy of Art in San Francisco, and majored in Philosophy at the University of Pittsburgh. He is a college art and design instructor and freelance artist.

Read other articles by Tim Sunderman as well as see his photography work.

Website: www.timsunderman.comWriter%20-%20Tim%20Sunderman.htmlhttp://www.timsunderman.comshapeimage_22_link_0shapeimage_22_link_1
Read this article in  Vhcle Magazine Issue 7