In their privacy statement they state they may not post all comments. CNN Comment Policy: CNN encourages you to add a comment to this discussion. You may not post any unlawful, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic or other material that would violate the law. Please note that CNN makes reasonable efforts to review all comments prior to posting and CNN may edit comments for clarity or to keep out questionable or off-topic material. All comments should be relevant to the post and remain respectful of other authors and commenters. By submitting your comment, you hereby give CNN the right, but not the obligation, to post, air, edit, exhibit, telecast, cablecast, webcast, re-use, publish, reproduce, use, license, print, distribute or otherwise use your comment(s) and accompanying personal identifying information via all forms of media now known or hereafter devised, worldwide, in perpetuity. CNN Privacy Statement. We must be the change we wish to see in the world. M Gandhi

I am a UW alumnus and support both Kevin Barrett's constitutional right to state his opinion, as well as his position at UW. I was one of the "alumni" that wrote, only I said I would stop donating if they DIDN'T keep Barrett.

I found it imprudent that your article didn't mention David Ray Griffin, or Stephen Jones, as high ranking American academics who have studied 9-11 extensively and published articles.

I guess the Professor with a Muslim sounding name seems more noticable?

There is a large movement in the US to find out who was responsible for 9-11 and CNN would be good to be on the side of the Constitution, and do its job.

I left this comment at the CNN blog. Let's see if they run it.

"Why doesn't CNN investigate, consider and present some of Barrett's evidence instead of covering Barrett himself? This is not about Barrett, or Stephen Jones, or David Ray Griffen, or Charlie Sheen. This is about what really happened on September 11, 2001. CNN should run its own investigation and not simply categorize the brilliant and brave people struggling to bring truth to the masses via the Internet as "controversial" and "offensive". CNN misses the point completely. Perhaps by design. Shame on you. You are part of the problem."

Please understand there are two Truth Camps:

Camp A - People who believe the 911 Commission Report was far from extensive and left extremely important questions unanswered (e.g., to what extent was the Pakistani ISI involved in 911 given that $100,000 wired to Mohammad Atta was traced to the head of the ISI; why did the commission lie for VP Cheney by saying he wasn’t in the WH bunker until after Flight 77 hit the pentagon when Norman Mineta’s sworn eyewitness testimony that places Cheney in the bunker at 9:20 as they tracked the plane into the pentagon). If your a person interested in understanding the full implications of what the Main Stream Media reported in fragmented pieces before, during and after 9/11 and how the commission purposefully fail to connect the dots then watch: “9/11 Press For Truth” on google or youtube. This documentary is brought to you by the four women (wives of 9/11 victems) that are responsible for there even being a 9/11 Report at all.

CAMP B - People who look at the evidence from a variety of sources (NIST Report, FEMA Report, 9/11 Commission Report, WTC physical evidence, video tapes, photographs, eyewitness reports / testimony, Main Stream Media reports, Trade Journal Articles, etc) and conclude that the CONCLUSIONS of the "official" government story are "fraudulent". This would include the actually mechanism for the collapse of the three (perhaps more) WTC buildings.

This 360 article is a classic example of providing just enough discussion of alternative 9/11 theory "evidence" to make any reasoned person conclude that a Controlled Demolition is nuts. The fact is that the "puffs" of smoke are by far not the only evidence supportive of a CD theory and are certainly not caused by overpressure (a) they occur up to 30 floors below the collapse, b) they are localized to one or two window - an overpressure would be much more widespread and symmetrical). Additionally there are numerous observations that can be made THAT CAN'T BE EXPLAINED BY A GRAVITY COLLPASE, AND BUT ARE CONSISTENT WITH A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.

What most people don’t realize is that the government is on its THIRD theory as to why the towers collapsed: 1) the steel melted, 2) the trusses failed causing a pancake collapse, and the newest 3) core column failure causing the outer columns to be pulled into the center, thus losing their ability to hold up the structure – resulting in a pile driver effect. Note that the latest theory is based solely on only video and photographic pictures that MAY show some exterior column bowing – as it was never considered that the bending seen in the video/photo’s may have been the result of the refraction caused by heated air around those areas.

So evidence of CD at the WTC Site includes, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TOO:

FORETHOUGHT:
NO steel structured high rise EVER totally collapsed for any reason before or after 9/11, even in cases where the fires burned for literally hours and hours and hours, engulfing the entire building like a touch – as was the case in the 2005 Madrid hotel fire which burned as an inferno for more than 17 hours (as compared to less then 1 hour and 2 hours for the WTC towers 1 and 2)

See http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/madrid_windsor.jpg

FORETHOUGHT:
NIST NEVER bothered to check for explosive residue or other bomb evidence in the WTC debris, even though there were reports of bombs and explosions from multiple sources. Therefore, they didn’t even consider the possibility even one day after 9/11. How did they know that the terrorists didn’t plant at least one bomb in the building visa-vi the 1993 bombing?

FORETHOUGHT:
Even though the WTC site was the largest crime scene in the history of the US, it was not treated as such. The evidence that would be needed to establish, CD or not, what brought down the towers was quickly removed and the steel was sent over seas to be recycled within weeks of 9/11. This means that the actually structural material can’t be examined to establish how to make SAFER buildings in the future. Protests to the removal of the structural components in this fashion were made:
In an article published on January 3 of 2002, James Quintiere, a Professor of Fire Protection Engineering at the University of Maryland, pointed out that fires could not have destroyed Twin Towers and Building 7. He lamented the recycling of the evidence, and called for a genuine investigation.
In the January 2002 issue of Fire Engineering Magazine, editor Bill Manning published an scathing attack on the destruction of WTC evidence, "$elling Out the Investigation", in which he called FEMA's "official investigation" a "half-baked farce".
FORETHOUGHT:
NIST’s own report specifically states that it does NOT address the mechanism of global collapse and is only responsible for detailing events UP TO the collapse initiation – thereby alleviating the need to explain the full dynamics of the collapse. Therefore, much of the evidence for CD is not explained formally by the NIST report. However, NIST has made an attempt to account, unscientifically, for some of the CD evidence on their website.

CD EVIDENCE FOR WTC 1 & 2:

* NIST’s own report shows that the truss systems did not fail. In fact in NIST’s actually tests the trusses only sagged 3 to 4” after twice the duration (2 hours), twice the dead load (on top), and much higher temperatures then the NIST report says existed in the towers. Despite their own physical tests, the final NIST computer model required 40 inches of truss sag, and the discarding of their own realistic input parameters for unrealistic extreme parameters, to get the towers to collapse! In addition, they refuse to release the visualizations of the computer model, a position which has been highly criticized by the structural engineering industry.

CD THEORY can explain the building collapse because it doesn’t require the truss to fail!

* NIST’s own report says the despite the fires and the plane damage that the buildings would NOT have collapsed without a wide dislodging fireproofing. Yet the report provides NO evidence that the fireproofing was widely dislodged; and provides only a ridiculous appendix experiment with a shotgun blast into a non-representative sample of fireproofed steel to show some dislodging can occur.

CD THEORY can explain the building collapse because it doesn’t require the fireproofing to be widely dislodged!

* NIST’s own report did NOT find evidence of that the fire temperatures exceeded 600’F anywhere in the towers and that the fire distribution was not complete. This means that the building structure should not have collapsed symmetrically.

CD THEORY can explain the building collapse because a top down controlled demolition perfectly explains how BOTH towers fell symmetrically and completely!

* NIST’s own report ignores original design estimates for the WTC – NIST’s estimates for column damage are FAR too low to cause the building’s collapse (e.g., interior core column losses would have had to have been twice what the NIST reports estimate, and exterior column losses would have had to have been almost 10 times what occurred).Remember that the WTC towers were extremely overbuilt and were designed to take the direct impact of a 707, similar in size and weight to a 767.

CD THEORY can explain the building collapse because the support core structure was destroyed using explosives. This also accounts for why WTC core is seen failing moments before the rest of the building (i.e., the radio tower falls several feet downward before the exterior of the building starts to descend).

* NIST’s own report details that the collapse of the WTC 1 & 2 buildings occurred at nearly free fall speed (under 11 seconds for both towers, about the time it takes for a ball to hit the ground if dropped from the tower tops). This means that the 70+ floors below the collapse zone posed little to no resistance to the building collapse, which defies physics (conservation of momentum) and is impossible without the use of explosives to remove the supporting structure.

CD THEORY can explain the building’s free fall collapse because the support core structure was destroyed using explosives.

* Complete pulverization of interior contents (people, desks, computer, office cabinets, etc) and nearly all concrete into micron sized particles, coupled with the expulsion of this material in a pyroclastic flow (i.e., like a ash from a volcanic eruption). Such observations are clear indications of the use of high explosives to generate the energy needed to pulverize the building to dust and super heat the air to create a pyroclastic flow. NOTE: NIST doesn’t attempt to explain the pulverization because it occurred after the “collapse initiation”, therefore they don’t even need to explain be basic contraction that if the building was turning to dust then there would have been no substantial material remaining to sustain a gravity collapse. In effect, a gravity collapse defies physics by breaking the law of conservation of energy.

CD THEORY can explain the building’s pulverization and pyroclastic flow through the use of high explosives.

* Complete destruction of the core is not explained by the NIST report. In no way could a gravity collapse completely dismantle the entire 47 column interlocking superstructure that was the core into 30’ length beams.

CD THEORY can explain the complete dismantling of the core into 30’ lengths through the use of high explosive cutting charges.

* The NIST report fails to explain how a gravity collapse can propel material laterally great distances from the build, including a 300 Ton WTC core columns flung over a football field distance into an adjacent building. Again, because the report doesn’t address issues after the collapse initiation, so they don’t need to address this FACT!

CD THEORY can explain were the energy came from for laterally (vertically) expelling material through the use of high explosive cutting charges.

* Flowing Molten Metal observed in the Pile and White Hot Steel Beams pulled from the wreckage 5 weeks after the collapse. A gravity collapse provides no mechanism for melting steel and certainly no mechanism to sustaining extreme heat over an extended period of weeks. In addition, NASA heat images showing temperatures at the Pile and at WTC in excess of 1300 degrees a week after the collapse. It was widely reported by that workers on the Pile went through multiple pairs of boots because they would literally melt while on the pile!

CD THEORY can explain how pools of molten metal formed if Thermate (or SuperThermate) was used. This material chemically reacts with steel to create a high energy explosion hot enough to instantaneously melt steel AND since it is a chemical reaction (steeling the oxygen from the steel – creating iron and other trace compounds) it does not need an oxygen source to continue (i.e., it can occur underwater!)

* Eyewitness reports of (e.g., William Rodriguez), and injuries directly associated with, an explosion in the first WTC tower’s subbasement just prior to the first plane hitting.

CD THEORY can explain why there was a massive explosion in the subbasement, as a bomb was used to weaken the core base.

* Firefighter reports of bombs in the buildings and of explosions going off in the building at specific floors (see Firefighter oral histories released 4 years after 9/11)

CD THEORY can explain why explosions occurred in the building, as cutter charges were used to weaken the building. IT IS NORMAL PROCEDURE IN A CD TO WEAKEN A BUILDING PRIOR TO SETTING OFF THE CHARGES THAT BRING DOWN THE BUILDING.

* Firefighter report of seeing white flashes and “pops” going off around one of the WTC buildings in a ring as the collapse occurred. (see Firefighter oral histories released 4 years after 9/11 and only after their release was forced.)

CD THEORY can explain these explosions perfectly.

* Photographs that MAY show beams severed by high energy cutter charges, as oppose to torches used in the WTC cleanup effort.

CD THEORY can explain why some of the core columns are seen with “clean” angled cuts that exhibit slag on both the inside and outside of the column (the columns are hollow). In some photos of columns ready for removal one can see a clear difference between columns with perfectly clean cuts, and those with ragged cuts made by torches used by metal workers to cut the beams.

For WTC 7

* The collapse of WTC 7 is such a mystery that the FEMA Report states that its fire theory has only a “low probability of occurrence.” The NIST report regarding WTC 7 won’t be out until 2007 & they are now going to consider looking into possible explosives.

CD Theory can explain why NIST and FEMA can’t figure out why the WTC 7 fell!

* Collapse of the WTC 7 building at free fall speed into its footprint in the EXACT fashion of a classic bottom to top Controlled Demolition. (a 47 story building – not hit by a plane – that housed the NYC’s emergency bunker and other government offices – that also collapses at free falls speed into its own foot print at 5:20pm on 9/11.)

CD Theory can explain why WTC 7 fell at free fall speed into its own footprint.

* Molten Metal / Hot Spots similar to those associated with WTC 1 & 2.

CD Theory can explain the molten metal and hot spots at WTC 7.

* Eyewitness description of a shockwave rolling through the building, blowing out windows, as the building started to collapse.

CD Theory can explain the eyewitness observations made.

* Collapse occurs in the exact style of a CD, the building crimped in the middle, and imploded (not exploded as would have been the case if the diesel generator fuel tanks had exploded). In fact, the collapse starts at the east penthouse far from the location of any structural damage that may have occurred from falling WTC debris.) In addition, a stop Swedish structural engineer, before knowing the building was WTC 7, was shown the collapse and was sure it was a classic controlled demolition.

EVERY TIME A BUILDING HAS FALLEN THAT LOOKS LIKE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION, IT WAS CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

* Demolition Squibs (those puffs of smoke) can been seen in the collapse sequence (no pancaking floors here!)

EVERY TIME A BUILDING HAS FALLEN THAT LOOKS LIKE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION, IT WAS CONTROLLED DEMOLITION!

I have just watched the coverage on the CNN website, finally someone is speaking out to students about the truth which is right in our face. I am shocked to see that there is finally some hint of truth in our brainwashing media even though its still accused to be a "conspiracy". In middle ages they banned heresy and now i guess is time to turn everything into conspiracy. Ive payed close attention to symbolism, fact and events and came to a conclusion that the world is so obviously misslead, whilst only the insiders know the real plans towards consolidation of a new world order. Operating under a facade of democracy we are really worshipping the horrifying back of the one dollar bill filled with symbolism of fascism, the all seeing eye and illuminati worship. And even the UN which is founded on the basis of fascist and communist ideology. Like he said 9/11 is the pearl harbour of 21st century, which no doubt has begun the war on terrorism, once a again a manufactured war from which only a very small minority will benefit. History indeed repeats itself, but at least we know why, someone makes sure it does. I study at the other side of the world, in Europe, but am fortunate to see that people are finally not affraid to question...after all arent citizens protected by freedom of speech?! Please if you will have time, send me some of your ideas and thoughts.

Cheers!

I find Barrett's argument healthy and interesting given the various historic Western and United State's governments involvements in several controversial events from stirring unrest in third world countries to staging military coups in rival countries, as well as involvement in assasinations and let's not forget the excellence in the art of coming up with pretext such as the invasion of Iraq based on (faulty) intel reports that the regime of that country (then) stockpiled weapons of mass destruction.

I think 9/11 is an event staged for political purposes in as much as Global Warming is spoken of with purely political zeal and incomplete scientific understanding. I think that Global Warming is a geo-cyclic event which we may never know the truth about before the beginning of another ice age if we live that long.

9/11 is a perfect pretext for:
------------------------------------
1. Invading Afghanestan: Thus sending the message to the Russians that, first, 'we control Central Asia', second, 'we (think, we) have won where you have shamefully failed".
* Gain: Getting closer to Central Asian oil reserves and reminding China that we are in Afghanestan just like we are in Taiwan.
2. Invading Iraq
* Gain: Control completely some 5% of the world oil reserves and probably 2% of the World production and send messages to the Venezuelan President and the Iranian President saying, 'your oil weapon is not so effective as it may have been in the past'.
3. Exercising greater control over the Arab states of the Persian Gulf (Saudi, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait e.t.c.)
* Gain: More leverage to the American military by allowing the Americans and some other Western powers to build bases and stockpile weapons in depots in those Gulf states.
4. Exercising more power and flex more muscle over the whole world as the U.S. relentlessly seek to contract the help of more scared parties in it's War on Terror - this point particularily appeals to Barrett's argument about The United States wanting to establish world domination - a 1000 year reich more reminiscent of the long reign of the Roman Empire rather than the short lived Nazi Germany.

Finally, if 3000 people could be killed in return of a global worth of oil supply and undisputed hegemony over the world then why not kill them.