Canadian Engineer and Scholar Question 9/11

Friday evening, March 23, approximately 65 visitors crowded into the SkyDragon in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada to attend the Hamilton 9/11 Truth Symposium which featured a viewing of 911 Mysteries followed by a talk with engineer Dr Bob Korol and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice member Graeme MacQueen.

Korol and MacQueen, both retired professors from McMaster University, discussed the topic of controlled demolition primarily focusing on an article authored by Graeme MacQueen entitled 118 Witnesses: The Firefighter's Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers published in PDF format at the Journal of 9/11 Studies.

A lively question and answer session followed with an overwhelming majority of the audience supporting the conclusions drawn by Korol and MacQueen. There was however a small minority of those who attempted to discredit the researchers using the typical technique of comparing those who question 9/11 with those who question the 1947 Roswell event.

Also in attendance was Ian Woods of Global Outlook as well as Dr. Frank R. Greening who had previously agreed to debate Dr Steven Jones in support of the government's official conspiracy theory. Ian Woods asked Dr. Greening to participate in a debate possibly to be held at an upcoming Truth conference in Vancouver. The acceptance of this challenge by Dr. Greening was captured on tape.

Overall, the event was a resounding success with discussions between concerned citizens continuing well into the night. Videos of this event are forthcoming. Additional information regarding Graeme MacQueen can also be found at the Patriots Question 9/11 website.

Please Note: The Toronto 911 Truth movement continues to pick up steam next weekend with two talks by scholar Michael Keefer on Mar 30 and Mar 31 as well as a Loose Change viewing on Mar 31.

They cant stop want cant be stopped.

Its coming out!!! the evidence speaks for itself, They cant stop want cant be stopped.

You're right, it can't be stopped.

So long as this issue remains squarely on the table and is not forgotten, we can't not WIN this info war, this psych war, all of it based on 9/11.

The trick is going to be to actually launch a real debate about the issues, and all the many observations, and questions raised.

To date, we've been forwarding all this information, and the other side, who supports the official narrative, all they've offered in return are an hominems and straw men arguments.

It is my hope and prayer that the release of Loose Change Final Cut will bring the information up into the level of a real debate of the issues raised by our movement.

Once that debate begins in earnest, the the OCT will fall, as it hangs by only the very thinnest of threads. It cannot be supported by any amount of scrutiny or rational analysis. In fact, one objective look at those trade center towers and building 7 going down rendered the official story myth about 9/11 null and void.

It's important that we force the other side to begin defending the official story against the physical reality of what really happened.

And in the final analysis, a grade ten physics student will shoot them down, armed with nothing buy a stopwatch and a few basic equations regading the law of free falling bodies, the laws of intertia, and forces of resistence which must have been encountered, but were not.

To use a Biblical analogy, this is a repeat of the story of David and Goliath where the stone employed is the stone of truth.
“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

In the final analysis..

..given the way and the manner in which those buildings were completely destroyed, the "mere" absense of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, from the New York City skyline, is THE number ONE "smoking gun" of 9/11. The myth simply does not square with the physical reality.

And so the final crux of the official story is this. "The planes hit, adn the buildings fell." That is the misdirected Occam's razor slight of hand theatrical psy-op magic trick that needs to be revealed. That is the "prestige" of 9/11.

You can go on and on about the false flag cover aspect regarding the hijackers, the lack of Air Force response, the Mineta testimony, and Pentagon crash scene, Shanksville, the ISI connection, etc., etc., but the central point in the field of collective awareness regarding what happened on 9/11 involves the "vanishing" of those two skycrapers, and building 7.

Furthermore, when we get right down to it, the official story about the Twin Towers "demise" is a collapse INITIATION hypothesis only. This can be refuted in terms of the strength of structural steal etc., BUT, the actual occurance of the COMPLETE and total near FREE FALL nature of "collapse" beyond that point, THAT, right there, is where the OCT apologists run into some very sticky problems, because that is the point, in that 10-12 second duration of destruction, where the laws of physics weigh into the debate.

It would sure be nice to see that part of the historical record enter into the mainstream debate, because that is what the debate boils right down to in the final analysis.

If the actual occurrance of destruction PROVES in unequivocal and irrefutable (uindebunkable) terms, that the three buildings in lower Manhatten were brought down via the use of explosives, and not fire, then it also proves that 9/11 was an inside job, and then the historical record on this event is altered, and becomes transformative, as a great point of learning, from generation to generation, and from age to age.

So again, the mere absense of those buildings from the NYC skyline is the finger of truth assigning guilt.

If our whole movement were to focus on and continually hammer on the reality of the near free fall destruction of the twins and building 7, then the debate would have the appropriate focal point, and at some stage, the science of engineering and physics would be forced to weight in on it.
“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

well, maybe

If the actual occurrance of destruction PROVES in unequivocal and irrefutable (uindebunkable) terms, that the three buildings in lower Manhatten were brought down via the use of explosives, and not fire, then it also proves that 9/11 was an inside job, and then the historical record on this event is altered, and becomes transformative, as a great point of learning, from generation to generation, and from age to age.

That's a big "if". I'm not arguing that "if" in either direction, simply because I don't have the technical knowledge to do so. Thus, I focus on the elements of the *undisputed* record which prove, in ways which don't rely on making any adverse assertions against said record, that we've been lied to. Essentially I use the official record against itself.

That's me, though; if you are 100% certain that that "if" is going to break our way, then by all means go for it. I would too if I had that certainty. ;-)

Want to figure out 9/11? Ponder the 9/11 "Mineta Stone"

100% certainty

"Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd." Voltaire

I think we underestimate the power of common sense. Certainly, we know that a magician's trick is still a trick despite the elegance of the stunt. The photographs really speak for themselves- we don't need 100% certainty any more than our government did to attack countries that did no harm to us.

Here is the certainty

Free fall time from the height of the twin towers, in a complete vacuum is 9.2 seconds. Factoring in terminal velocity due to air resistance, it's 10-12 seconds, depending on the size, shape and surface area to mass ration of the object. Towers fell from top to bottom, in 12-14 seconds, thus within a mere second or two of absolute free fall in nothing but air. Therefore, the ONLY remaining alotted timeframe, within which every single weld and joint would have had to fail, absent the use of explosives, all along the entire remaining length of structure, is one or two seconds. One two.

Thought experiment:


North Tower, pre-"collapse"


What the official story is asking us to believe, is impossible. Namely, that the debris from the upper section was able to plow down through the entire remaining length of undamaged structure, or through the path of maximal resistence, to within a single second of two of the free fall time for any freely dropped object from the height of the twin towers.  

This is why these buildings only come down at or near free fall speed, SOLELY, as a result of a controlled demolition, or an implosion - in the case of the twin towers, an explosive controlled demolition, the first of its kind.

In short, we do not require the steel. Only the videos, a stopwatch, and a few basic equations. 

 First Law of Intertia: An object in uniform motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by a force of resistance. 

Third Law: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. 

 It reduces to a simple thought experiment, for which you do not have to be a physics professor, to graps. Only common sense.

 It should also be noted that free fall is not mass dependant.

 The buildings exploded from the top down, as if there was ZERO in the way of resistence encountered, all the way down to the ground. 

 Also, the bulk of building mass was ejected laterally, in that foutain-like cascading debris plume leaving little more than mere atmosphere, above the remaining length of structure, and so the process involved increasing weight UNloading, not loading. 


“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth” ~ George W. Bush

Still more certainty

btw, how do you get the Youtube window frame in the post?

“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

To the upper right, there's an EMBED code

just copy/paste it.


interns < internets

Don't know what you mean. Where?

“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

Marked with a red box underneath:


interns < internets

I prefer this clip

this video is for use with "newbies"

( thank you for the quote ;-) )

its time is about 60 seconds (74 excact)
and it is able to draw attention to everyone who knows, what 911 means.
there are enough very good videos and evidence out there.
but no averageman wants to read long discussions on evidence at the "first contact".
just let them hear and see - with this short clip
enough, to begin a discussion ore to give them other DVD's
i am sure, all will begin to wake up

if one has seen this clip, there are only 2 possible negative statements:
1. "its a fake!"
2. "if it was really an inside job, i am sure, the gowvernment has had good reasons for doing this"

the rest is wakening up and hang on your lips for further explainings.


i try to improve the sound a litle bit
use good audio equipment with subwoofer, when you show it.

dont forget to download the HQ version of this clip !
new versions are avaiable here:


Robert, if you know

any physicists... could you ask them to calculate how long it would take the collapse to complete if the tower portion below were made of balsa wood? I'm serious. I would love to have it as a talking point.

Sorry, don't have that

But we do know that in absolute nothingness, except for air alone, the fall time for any freely dropped object, again, in nothing but air, from the height of the twin towers, is about 10-12 seconds, depending on the size, shape, and surface area to mass ratio of the object. ANY object.

If the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST reports, are to be believed, the South Tower went down in 10 seconds, and the North in a little more than 9, but that's not entirely accurate.

The ONLY argument against this free fall aspect, is the observation of outer perimeter steel beam framework moving down ahead of the upper threshold ejecting debris plume. They try to use that to say nope, not free fall, when all the while, the rest of the building chased those pieces down and hit the ground all of it, to within a second or two of the leading pieces of perimeter framework.

Also, steel beam framework was ejected up to 470-500 feet away from the north tower, hitting half way across the Winter Garden Atrium.

And finally, as I pointed out, half way into the "collapse" there's essentially, half LESS building remaining above the remaining half - leading to what I call "The Foot Of God Hypothesis" absent the use of explosives.
“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

Excellent picture!

I have never seen this shot before.

Nice graphics!

I tried to make a drawing of the same concept, but it didn't turn out as good as this one. I want to make flyers using this illustration with the caption "Which will fall faster?"

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

What uncertainty is there?

What are chances that buildings mimic controlled demolitions spontaneously? What are chances that coincidentally, 83 (WTC7) or 287 (TT) columns give up the ghost simultaneously from inhomogenous fires?

1 minus that chance is the probability that the buildings were in fact intentionally demolished. In numbers, that is approximately 0.9999999999999999999999999999

So we have the proof already, and it's in the footage -- unless you believe in fiery miracles. The fact that the buildings fell the way they did constitutes evidence for anyone thinking this through.

interns < internets

ok, but

If it's that obvious, why aren't there thousands (or more) of experts already on the record from around the world saying the same thing? Jowenko, for instance. He still thinks the TT weren't a CD, apparently. If it isn't obvious to him, I'd like to know why not, rather than assuming I know enough about a unique event to weigh in conclusively on it.

"Logic: the art of going wrong with confidence."

Ultimately, I have plenty of questions about the TT and WTC7, and am following along as new videos and reports continue to emerge. I just want to proceed with caution, so I'm sticking to what is undisputed and indisputable; for me, that means things other than CDs -- so far.

Want to figure out 9/11? Ponder the 9/11 "Mineta Stone"

Not conventional "controlled demolition"

Jowenko thinks the towers looked nothing like the kind of controlled demolition his company and companies like his do -- because they were not. They started at the top, they spewed debris outward, and so forth. They were explosive demolitions.

I am quite sure that his reluctance to say "It looks like somebody blew them up" has more to do with political/psychological factors than with an inability to see the substantial amount of energy added to the buildings to pulverize them. Remember, he didn't know which building he was seeing when first shown 7. He certainly would have recognized the towers, and that fact would influence what he said.


i think he considers the towers 'outside his competence', - in a 'political' way - because they were not the type of 'classic' controlled demolitions that he is an expert in.

yeah, what you said,haha. i

yeah, what you said,haha. i should have read your post before responding to him. he had no idea he was looking at 9/11 footage. which really highlights how good the media has been at ignoring WTC7(just like the 9/11 Commission did). why do you suspect that would happen Sam?

i'll tell you exactly why.

i'll tell you exactly why. because he knew what the twin towers were and thus knew the implications of stating that it was CD. when he first saw WTC7 fall(i believe his reaction is on tape)he had no idea what building he was looking at. he didnt know it was 9/11.

Is my line of reasoning faulty?

I think not. There remains the infinitesimal chance of a CD-like phenomenon occuring spontaneously, 1 minus that is the probability that the observed CD was manmade -- it doesn't even matter in what way, exactly...

interns < internets

Who the hell voted this down

and moreso: why?

interns < internets


I agree with you except to say, the only thing left to debate is whether the traitors behind 9/11 should be shot or hanged.

You write very well!

Your Foot of God article is excellent, as are your comments here. Thank you.

Thank you

Here's my "Foot of God" article posted at

NIST and "The Foot Of God" Hypothesis

And now that we have in hand the *entire blueprints* of the Twin Towers, compliments of an anonymous sender from Silverstein Properties who sent them to Steven Jones who in turn sent them to Dylan Avery, the picture becomes clearer and clearer the result of which some day soon, the historical record will have to take all this into consideration. There's just too much information for it not to. We're not talking here about a magic bullet and a grassy knoll or a grainy film, and this aint the 60's the 70's, the 80's, or even the 90's (when the net was starting to take hold). We're in the oh oh's now. Oh oh, for the perps. .

As those working drawings are prosessed, from an engineering and physics perspective, more and more we'll know about the forces of resistence would have HAD to have been encountered, thus proving once again, the use of explosives, and therefore, inside job.
“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

Thanks for the first-hand report.

Korol sounds like a person eminently qualified to offer an opinion to be seriously considered;

"Bob Korol, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Civil Engineering at McMaster University, was feted by 500 practising engineers from the region for his research work in the area of design of steel structures and in helping to develop sustainable cities at home and abroad."

These guys are really slick

These guys are really slick and seem very interested in getting more deeply involved.

By the way, wait till you

By the way, wait till you see the video of this, the theories put out by the "debunkers" were pretty unbelievable.

video - when it's going to be ready?

I think it's critical to get people like Bob Korol on the record. Before video is ready, can you please just sum up what did this gentleman say about WTC/WTC 7?

Contact Info for Dylan Avery?

Hey Everyone,

I'm a sound effects editor / designer, and I'm very interested in contacting Dylan to talk about the audio post-production of Final Cut. A company I work with often would be able to offer post services for a reasonable rate (or a package deal), and my supervisor (one of the company's owners) is a truther as well. We're very interested in this.

You can email me at

stuart[at symbol]soundbreeder[dot]com

I'd really appreciate it if someone could help me out!


Stuart Provine

Just email Dylan

His email address is at their website, and he checks it, and usually replies, if appropriate, within three to four days.

But they are in Hollywood and are in the post-production phase, so I think they've got what they need already.

I'm sure that Dylan will start up another project at some point however.

I've been encouraging him to consider a film which offers the entire larger historical framework surrouinding 9/11 in another film, to "frame" LCFC, in it's rightful historical context.

People, once they "get" that 9/11 WAS in fact, and inside job, will then need to have the context and framing by which to understand it, and to "grok" it, in terms of its larger historical implications and significance.
“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

I totally agree with

"People, once they "get" that 9/11 WAS in fact, and inside job, will then need to have the context and framing by which to understand it, and to "grok" it, in terms of its larger historical implications and significance."

We need to break free from the shackles of fear which governments worldwide use to enslave the masses.


"Nothing will benefit human health and increase the chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet." Albert Einstein

A film about the movement itself

could be a great film and a very useful tool, if done correctly.

Something called "Waking Up From The 9/11 Nightmare" perhaps.

Interviewing people before they know, filming them while they are in the process of being awakened and interviewing them after they know. If done properly this could be incredibly powerful and useful in rapidly bringing others into the movement.

Another thing we should do, and I may start doing this very soon myself, is to start producing short video's called "I'm a Truther" that would be posted on YouTube. These would be short interviews with truthers saying who they are, where they're from, what woke them up to 9/11 Truth, what 9/11 truth means to them and where they see the movement and the country going. These short interviews with people of all ages and backgrounds could be an incredibly powerful way to open peoples eyes and get them to really look at the truth of 9/11.

The msm is not going to help us willingly, they will have to be dragged, kicking and screaming every inch of the way, to cover the story.

We need to be the media.

I hope that you and yours are well.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Get a camcorder

and begin at once.

That sounds cool. I've seen some totally lame videos on Youtube which have been viewed 100's of 1000's of times, with 100's and 100's of comments.

It would be nice to see more of a truther Youtube blogging presence emerging.

Those videos you're talking about will be very interesting to watch!

Good idea!
“We will export death and violence to the four corners of the earth”
~ George W. Bush

I just love

hearing new scholars getting involved with 9/11 truth and unearthing new perspectives in a reasoned manner.


"Nothing will benefit human health and increase the chances for survival of life on Earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet." Albert Einstein

plain and simple...

the laws of physics cannot be suspended for a day in september - end of story.

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

from the San Francisco Chronicle

Giuliani works the Fat Lady in Oakland / CAMPAIGN 2008: Ex-N.Y. mayor makes clear the benefits of early primary -- for politicos and the public

The crowd at the Fat Lady restaurant was not particularly large, but the number of protesters was even smaller. Dana Carson of Oakland was one of two anti-Giuliani protesters who showed up. Chronicle photo by Kurt Rogers

The Eleventh Day of Every Month

that's the way you do it

good job Oakland!

The fight for 9/11 Truth goes on

Linking to "Patriotsquestion"

For those who are not aware, while this website has a lot of names lined up to question the official version, it chooses to include amongst those names the same people that most activists on here and numerous researchers have had to spend a great deal of time debunking, refuting and exposing -

- Judy Wood (energy beams)
- Morgan Reynolds (no planes at the WTC)
- David Shayler (holograms at the WTC)
- Jim Fetzer (promotion of all of the above)

It makes absolutely no sense that the webmaster would continue to ignore requests by many people to remove these or some of these from the list. Numerous people -- even prominent ones -- have pointed out these examples and asked the webmaster to consider their inclusion and the webmaster ignores it.

Please consider this when you link to and promote this site. You are teaching people that Morgan Reynolds is someone we all look up to as a prominent speaker and that its okay with us for ex-intelligence agents to tell newspapers that holograms hit the WTC -- "Gee, he's listed on Patriots Question, so I guess that's okay to tell the newspapers that missiles wrapped in holograms hit the buildings. Afterall, isn't any news good news?"

But a more rational response might be, "Gosh, I guess the conspiracy theorists are far nuttier than anyone realizes. Glad I never got mixed up in all THAT mess."

You are right...  

You are right...


I'm not saying you're wrong, but...

One thing which always seems to go by unnoticed is that if there is no 9/11 inside job, and thus no need for a cover-up, there is also no reason for people with something to lose to be spewing goofy 9/11 theories and blowing their credibility in the process. The only way it makes sense that all these people are saying all this stuff, is if there is some sort of fire under all that smoke. So, even granting your point about certain people being bad examples of legitimate 9/11 truthers, they still serve as important evidence that something is fishy here! Their comments still do not jibe with the OCT.

That said, I share your concern about the possible negative repercussions.

Want to figure out 9/11? Ponder the 9/11 "Mineta Stone"

Are you saying that Wood, Reynolds, and Fetzer

don't love their country? You should back that up. I asked you to do it before, and you did not. Now here are again, badmouthing a website because it includes a few people you disagree with.

Wood and Reynolds have filed requests for correction with NIST under the Data Quality Act. It will be interesting to see how NIST responds. What we or John Q. Public think about their ideas is not going to determine NIST's response.