White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs is Reviewing 9/11 Thermite Paper !

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs received the Thermite paper on August 11, 2009. Contact Mr. Gibbs to find out what he is doing with this information. Here is the 9/11 Thermite document:
Download it and share it with any and all people especially government officials.


Back to Gillibrand!

Good job in getting this paper into Robert Gibb's hands... It might just be symbolic but at least this shows chutzpah.

How about Senator Gillibrand? She seem genuinely receptive to investigating 9/11. Didn't Manny give her this paper? Let's follow up with her. And how about Dennis Kucinich? We need to focus on getting him to take some action. Come on Ohio activists. We need positive action in Congress by people most likely to deliver it.


"Oh, I thought the paper was on termites in the World Trade Center, so I passed it along to OSHA." -- Robert Gibbs' future explanation for knowing nothing about Thermite in the World Trade Center.

Dean Jackson/Editor-in-Chief DNotice.org
Washington, DC

I know Dennis Kucinich

gets it. I spoke to his wife when he was running for President and gave her a video. Believe me they know the truth. Between assassination squads and threats of more "terrorist" attacks I would imagine they feel vulnerable. The people who did 9/11 would have no problem killing a congressman's family member ..even a child ..as an example. Obama has kept the corrupt Bush appointees in the DOJ . Why? They have their bases covered. Obama is a puppet.

Obama is a puppet.

You hit the nail on the head. They are all puppets. Step out of line and it means death to them or their families. Obama included. When will they grow some balls? Never! I think we should change our strategy. We will never get an honest investigation. Remember they got Al Capone on tax evasion, not on all his other crimes. We need to come up with a back door approach. Any suggestions?

Insider trading

I've been saying for years that the "back door" investigation would be to look at the insider trading charges. I thought Kucinich was going to do that. Apparently not.

Excellent Idea

Perhaps we could get them on no WMD's in Iraq or the missing trillions Cynthia McKenney grilled Rummy about. There must be some other approach. A direct assault on 9/11 isn't working. We have some smart guys and gals in the truth movement. We should be able to come up with something.

You are right. It just isn't working.

And that is why I think going after the alternative media could be our only hope.

I don't think getting them on WMD or missing trillions will work. The public just isn't interested enough now that Bush is out. The media won't follow it anymore. Nobody really cares. If the public KNEW the facts of 9/11, they WOULD care, and that is why the big effort and pressure on the media to keep the information out. But all of the other issues lose steam after a while, and when both sides battle it out and the public wearies of the whole thing.

Getting the information out into the alternative media could work. The alternative media is being pressured/threatened in some way. They have censored 9/11 just as much as msm, and they will NOT break the censorship...........or at least haven't. Somethign is going on. Any media group that constantly has presented issues like the torture, wiretapping, illegality of the wars and occupations, lying about WMD, etc, would normally be interested in the far greater importance and factual legitimacy of 9/11 truth. Something else is going on.

One possibility of why alternative media is blocking our evidence is the foundational support they get which probably allows their continued existence. If you follow these foundations, you almost always end up finding these foundations are headed or founded by the same elites that own the msm and control most media venues.

Some of the alternative media that should be embarrassed into presenting 9/11 information would include Alternet (Joshua Holland is senior writer and editor and regularly insults the 9/11 movement), Amy Goodman at DemocracyNow!, antiwar.com (Justin Raimondo.........started long ago investigating the roots of 9/11 and then made a quick turnaround and insulted the movement), CommonDreams (also presented insulting articles), Counterpunch (Alexander Cockburn...............also insulted 9/11 truth), MotherJones, the Nation, and others. All of these have foundational support. I think the pressure comes from certain elements in their financial support.

One time a big name in the 9/11 movement told me we should bear down too hard on alternative media because we need them to stay on our side.
Well, that consideration is unworthy. The alternative media has done NOTHING for us, and we have been quite nice to them. In fact, I'd imagine many of us have supported them. At best they have completely ignored our truth. They have purposely decided to NEVER present good informative articles about our evidence. And at worst they have mocked what we do and what we believe, always comparing us to moonlanding deniers and even holocaust deniers. They are not our friends. But under pressure, exposure, blatant protests, they may feel that they would be better off being our friends and working with us.

I think the time is now to make a change in our relationship to these venues. They always remind their readers, when requesting support, that they are our only hope of exposure of the issues not presented by the msm, and they tell us how honest and brave they are. Ever hear Amy Goodman's speeches about the great quality and virtue of the alternative media? Think of that and then think of how she has ignored the single news item in the history of our nation! Same goes for Bill Moyers. I like these people. Until I realized how they had conspired to never present any 9/11 truth information, they were my heroes. But they have failed us and they have done it on purpose. Exactly the purpose I don't know.
Wish I did.

People living around Amy Goodman or Bill Moyers or the others should think about confronting these people just like you brave people have confronted our political leaders.

Good job. But it won't help.

I hate to be pessimistic, but the reality is that no matter how many of our lawmakers get the information, even publicly receive it, nothing will happen. They know there are problems with 9/11. What is the point of telling the truth someone already ignoring the truth.

I like these encounters. They make me feel that something is happening. I am awed by the bravery of those who do it. But, sadly, I don't think it will change a thing.

What do I think WILL change the status quo? Going after the alternative media. Hounding these media outlets. Embarrassing them publicly until they begin to present at least a little of the information that the 9/11 truth movement has.

Amy Goodman of DemocracyNow completely ignores 9/11 truth. She is not a comrad nor an allied warrior. She is completely avoiding the subject that we hold so dear and know should be exposed to the public. While she seems on our side, with all of the exposure of the torture and lies about war and other issues, she is no different than the msm or our political leaders when it comes to 9/11. It wasn't easy for me to make this jump about Amy, as she was a hero of mine until I realized that she has really helped keep 9/11 truth in the fringes, even in the progressive community .

And the same goes for those at Alternet, like Joshua Holland, and Common Dreams, and Counterpunch, and antiwar.com.
All of these venues have not only ignored our evidence, but have written articles insulting the movement.
All of them are in the same box as our political leaders, but even worse as they pose as the presenters of the truth that is withheld from us by the msm and our lawmakers.

I would love to see a campaign of giving our 9/11 information to all of those in the alternative media. It might just work. Giving to political leaders will never work. Ever.

The rest of the world is going to bust this wide open

Don't forget the rest of the world.

I wouldn't count on it

ROW can help, but I'm afraid the Americans have to be the prime movers here. There aren't many countries that would be ready to take action in this respect.

If even 5 percent of the Americans who don't believe the OCT demonstrated in front of NYT or Washington Post, something might happen. But why don't they?

I've been hoping for that, and it just might happen.

I am guardedly optimistic that the rest of the world will break it wide open.
So far not too much has happened.
Niels Harrit says that even in Denmark 9/11 truth is avoided by the press and often mocked.
It is hard to imagine, but I think the forces that block 9/11 info from our media, even our alternative media, also put pressure on the bigger international news sources.
And the most likely societies and countries to break open 9/11 truth, the Islamic nations, have remained mum about it for some mysterious reason.
The only nation to have made some statements about 9/11 truth, in the positive, has been Venezuela, although there may be others.


Well, Vesa, I would agree that American activists are extremely important in the struggle, but whether or not they have to take the lead is not so clear to me. How can we know this? We can't. We can't predict the future on this, we just have to try every strategy we can think of. Please don't underestimate ROW. That would be like New Yorkers underestimating ROC (rest of the country) or 911Blogger underestimating ROI (rest of the internet). ROW is very big....

True. However...

... I (also) live in ROW and my view is affected by my experience of Finnish politics and mainstream media.

Long climb.

Speaking as an "ROW" Canuck, I think it's the same here as everywhere.
A certain portion of the populace is totally unconnected, don't know don't give a damn. (50%?)
Another portion is successfully conditioned to trust authorities and believes the OCT despite all evidence to the contrary. (25%?)
Another portion is convinced, based on the evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. (25%?)
Of the last 25% a small portion are actively trying to educate the rest. (10% of 25%?)
They are here and on other 9/11 Truth based forums and websites and occasionally on the streets actively informing the public (and in some cases ending up in psychiatric wards for exercising their freedom of speech.)
It's a long steep uphill climb to the Truth in a time of universal deceit folks.

What is ROW?

I'm embarrassed to ask, but it just doesn't ring a bell.


'Rest of the world,' apparently. It didn't ring a bell for me, either, until reviewing some of the comments. Live and learn!

Tip: Acronym Finder


Had to look up "ETA" recently, because the only meaning I knew about was "Expected Time of Arrival". Apparently it also means: "Edited To Add".

This paper is peer reviewed right?

Have there been any responses yet? Anyone trying to disprove these results?

"Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government." -The Declaration of Independence

Oh, my! That is a great look into how far..............

..................a scientist will go to confuse and scramble a subject if they have an agenda.
This is worth the read, just to understand the deviousness of people supposedly of science.

As ridiculous as these responses are by these scientists I'm afraid that the media could take their statements and use them in articles if we could ever get the media to present Dr. Jones' work in the first place. The general public will probably just skim the information and put it aside as if it were just a controversial matter undecided and of no real consequence.
They do the same with global warming information. Just cause confusion and a fog over the whole subject.

I hope to

gather some of that information as it's scattered all over the web...

Those carefully reading that discussion indeed find rather weak arguments by the other side. I like to remind people that even if the red/gray chips were paint chips, then it would be extremely dangerous paint and that in itself would completely invalidate the NIST report. Furthermore, paint does not cause a highly exothermic redox reaction which produces previously molten iron-rich microspheres when heated, nor does paint contain sophisticated nano-aluminum platelets approx. 40 nm in size. These arguments alone put to rest the absurd prevarications by the deniers.

The red/gray chips aren't paint chips, nor are they micrometeorites, nor are they printer toner, nor are they kaolinite. They are experimental military Metastable Intermolecular Composites (MIC's), and they have no business in WTC dust....

On the other hand, every failed attempt to falsify only further strengthens the Active Thermitic Materials paper. This paper is receiving a monumental amount of peer review: scientists all across the world are reading it online. Jones et. al. in their own words "nailed it".

Do you have a way to know how many are reading it?


Are you surmising that there are a lot of people reading the Active Thermitic Materials paper, based on what you hear and read, or do you have a particular way of knowing what sorts of numbers of people are reading it online?

If there is a way of knowing the numbers of readers or hits the paper gets that would be worthy to post.


I don't have numbers unfortunately, I'm guessing. But it is an educated guess: there are discussions in Italy, Denmark and Norway. Then there are the scientific forums, such as the 9/11 free forum, physorg, sciforums, and others I've run into, where long discussions are taking place, often involving people with qualifications.

For the paper itself you have not only Bentham's peer review and BYU's peer review, but also indedepent verification by Mark Basile and Frédéric Henry-Couannier.

Let's not forget the debunkers over at JREF. There are many additional eyeballs looking at this paper here and over @ abovetopsecret, and who knows how many other forums. Among the participants in these discussions are bound to be more qualified people. This results in various assaults on the paper, and every assault successfully fended off further strengthens the paper. Of course I'm not telling you something completely new, you have such discussions with peers at various forums too. (And you're doing a great job, imo)

Last but not least, we have WAC putting this paper into the hands of various people with influence and we have other activists offering printed copies to scientists with a request to peer review it. There aren't many scientific papers that can claim such public and activist engagement, in fact, this may be a historical first!

The webmaster for Bentham should have the exact number of downloads. This number will be somewhat inaccurate due to either local area networks behind one ip address or alternatively multiple downloads by the same person, but it can still give a good indication of the online interest for this paper. I don't know if you guys at J.O.N.E.S. have access to these statistics, but if not it would be a good idea to ask Bentham's webmaster. After all, Jones et. al. paid for the paper to be available to all for free, some download statistics are certainly not too much too ask.

In fact, if you can map these statistics to events advertising this paper, you have in your hands some very valuable feedback: what specific event or publication generated peak interest and why. Such statistics are industry standard in IT...

Below, for reference (and for fun), a small summary of publicity around the nano-thermite paper:

Something is curious about that list. Anybody notice..........

.................that there is nothing about any of our alternative media sources exposing or even mentioning the paper?

Our alternative media has presented mountains of articles and evidence about torture, WMD, the illegalities of the wars and occupations, wiretapping, and a lot more.
And yet NOTHING, EVER, about the evidence of 9/11, not even when there is something that "nails it".

What is going on?

Alternet, DemocracyNow!, antiwar.com, CommonDreams, Counterpunch, MotherJones, Zmag, the Nation..........and others..........NONE of them have even mentioned the paper.
This is more than curious. It is more than an oversight. They must know about the paper. But they will not present it at all.
This means that they have been pressured or threatened about this subject, and this subject alone. It seems all other issues are ok for them to expose, but not this.

What can we call this? They have purposely and collectively CENSORED vital information from the American public. This information may be some of the most important ever in our history, but they have censored it.
Isn't that called a conspiracy????
And if it is a conspiracy, does the idea of treason creep into one's mind?

Are we afraid to say it? We say it about Bush and Cheney and the CIA and FBI.............we say some elements there conspired to coverup 9/11. I say that is treason. So do others.
But what about when all of our alternative media sources censor all of the information, ALL of the information, about one very important subject and they do it collectively and purposely? Treason?

I believe the term is

...misprision of treason. I agree with you. There is, however, also a simpler explanation: alternative media are obsessed with the effort to be taken seriously, and are afraid to venture off the beaten path. The same struggle is going on inside the truth movement, and sometimes it's legitimate. The thing is, we have to convince the alternative media that this defensive resistance against our massive movement is illegitimate. Unless some of these alternative media are on the take, the dam will crack some day. I hope it won't be too late by then. It's getting pretty late already.