The following invitation from Jane Clark and Mick Harrison of the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry speaks for itself. It came by email this evening, about three hours ago. I hope their offer allows thousands more people to benefit from the conference than were able to during the event on Sept. 11 of this year and in the week afterward. — MCM

–   –   –

Dear ________,

Since technical difficulties prevented many from reaching our Global Livestream Conference on Sept. 11, 2021, we would like to direct you to the Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry’s YouTube site to review the individual presentations that relate to 9/11 and the anthrax attacks, which are posted there along with additional videos. (There’s no fee or charge to view.)

Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry – YouTube

When you get to the Youtube site, you should be able to see all of the individualized speaker videos regarding 9/11 and the anthrax attacks from our conference.

Additional videos from the conference, some of which address pandemic issues, are available via Super U at the following link:

Lawyers’ Committee on Super U

We apologize again for any problems you may have had before, during, or after the 2021 Global Livestream Conference or if you have had any trouble with the replay link as well.

Please contact us at info@lcfor911.org if you need  to get any further help on these conference videos.

Thank you for your support.

Sincerely, 

Jane A. Clark, Chairman of the Board for the Lawyers’ Committee for 911 Inquiry, Inc.

Mick G. Harrison, Attorney at Law. Executive Director, Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc.

The following was emailed out last night by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Its author is an executive producer of the film “The Unspeakable” and an actor. — MCM

Someone Said, ‘Look’

By William Hurt

I was born in 1950. Mom moved back to New York City with my two brothers and me in 1955, and we became New Yorkers.

I watched the South Tower “top off” in ’71. Mom had worked close to the Empire State Building during the War and would mention when we were growing up how, on a foggy July day in 1945, a B-25 had flown right into it. In ’78, I was watching the antenna being attached to the North Tower and remarked to my first-grade buddy that somebody “sure could run into those big things.” 

Many veteran New Yorkers were rubbed the wrong way by their design. Manhattan is actually a small piece of real estate. Interwoven neighborhoods. People walk there. Shoulder to shoulder. I tended to stay far away from them even though I worked in a little theatre only 15 or so blocks away for 12 years.

At age 51, I permanently moved away with my younger sons two weeks before September 11, 2001. The towers were indelible reference points to me by then. To all of us. 

On the day of the attack, I was in Boston with my eldest in a café having breakfast, with the pickup parked and packed, ready to go to Montreal for a gig. There was a little TV hung to the molding of a wall. Someone said, “Look.”

Being a general aviation pilot, my first thought was, “That’s no small plane. And no accident.” My next thought was of family and close friends. We called and, thank goodness, they were all okay. My third thought was about the borders. I assumed the borders would be closed immediately. I had a contract in Montreal to get to that day. I prayed that they would stay closed so that my contract wouldn’t force me to go to Canada only for the borders to be closed again, leaving me stranded from my kids.

Then the second plane hit. I started thinking about those lost. The massiveness. A completely new kind of shock entered my life. I hoped with all my heart that the first responders would be okay. Then the towers fell. And the world changed.

Unbelievably, the border did open up again the very next day. I was floored. The contract said I had to go. I hugged my kid and drove, shattered.

In my case, the journey toward understanding started with an unusual emotional experience. Ten days later, on the film set in Montreal, it seemed a nightmare that no one was stopping, even on their own, let alone as a group, to absorb this paradigm shift. Where was the ritual of mutual care when something massively terrible happens? I felt alone. A catastrophe of infinite meaning had taken place, and we were routinely going about our professional duties, saying nothing about it. Maybe it was just too big. Moviemaking is myopic like that. But it seemed wrong. Deep emotional turmoil filled me. Worry for my children.

It was a busy scene involving over a hundred people. As I returned to what they call “start marks” for another “master shot” (of the whole scene before tighter “coverage” setups begin), I stopped. And I suddenly couldn’t remember where I was. What city was I in?

Then my body just “went” to New York. It was “there,” floating high up inside one of the imploding towers. I was trying to catch the falling bodies in my arms. Trying to pick them from out of everything and grab them to my chest to save them, but everything was passing through me — the immense pieces of concrete and superstructure mingled with the bodies of my fellows. I couldn’t catch them. They went through my arms. Everything did. I was what they call “losing it.”

A crew member came up and said, “Mr. Hurt, we’re ready.” I had no idea what he meant. The man asked, “Are you okay?” I heard his voice and said, “I don’t think so.”

They led me to a trailer outside. Some caring people came to talk to me for a little while. The administration wanted to get the set back to work. One person, a fellow actor, seemed to understand. She recognized that I was going into deep shock.

I left the set and they sent a doctor. Someone wrote “possible TIA” (transient ischemic attack) on a piece of paper. But months later, after scans, that was completely ruled out. What happened was not a physical problem. 

For me, the overriding fact was supremely simple. It was that, to my knowledge, big buildings just couldn’t fall down that way, under any circumstances. It had never happened because, well, it couldn’t happen. I kept finding myself saying to others, “But, look, buildings like that can’t pulverize to dust in mid-air and just fall down smack straight into their own socks.” No building constructed anything like them in the history of the whole world had ever fallen down like those buildings fell, except for one cause. In earlier days, I’d done some light construction work. I’d seen a couple of smaller things (like big silos) brought down. It was a kick. I asked how it was done. The answer? “Very, very carefully.”

A day later I was back at work. Another week later, and by sheer coincidence, there we were, filming on location in NYC. Prior to 9/11, a reservation had been made for us to stay at a hotel 12 blocks north of Ground Zero. I asked the young elevator man as we first went up to the room if he’d lost anyone close. Surprised and instantly in tears, he said, “My uncle. He was the window-washing machines overseer. Never missed a day.” Off my room, there was a patio. I could look down the avenue and see the site, smoldering in the night lights. In horror, I knew what it was partly made of. We all did. What I didn’t know at that time: Thermite keeps burning a long time. At night, I’d go down. They let me through the barriers because I was recognized. I’d talk to and hug the first responders. 

It never left me.

The discrepancy.

The difference between the story we were told to believe and its impossibility.

I felt alone until 2013. Then I couldn’t stand it anymore, and I started digging. Digging for truth in the rubble of the official lie, then in another heavier layer of rubble that lay in my own mind, installed there by our mass media.

It took a while but, finally, I found pieces of evidence online. Mixed in among all the nonsense, there was sane and reasoned evidence. One of the sources, the strongest one by far, a source supported by thousands of responsible, honest, honorable, grounded, normal, respectful people — professional architects and engineers all around the world — was Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. An amazing act of courage and compassion meets us there when we can bring ourselves to seek the answers.

Why did I wait so long, like so many others, to start digging? It astonishes me, until I look at the size of what happened and also at my inability to believe that my government could have betrayed the families of those killed that day by not giving them the first thing they were owed: the truth.  

It relieves me immensely to have given my name and my artistic advice as an executive producer of the new film The Unspeakable. I also deeply respect the definitive film SEVEN about the “other” building so few know of that also, somehow, fell neatly, “smack straight into its own socks” that day. An impossibility in any way but one.

Unspeakable is about a horror that was committed upon innocent people and about their friends and loved ones struggling to heal while the truth is suppressed by those we are supposed to be able to trust. It’s also about the attempt to break the individual human heart and spirit — but how it cannot be broken in some.

The meaning of such evil acts can’t really be measured in numbers. The measure is taken one mother or father or sister or friend at a time. The question is not how could anyone do this to so many, but how could anyone do this to anyone.

The human heart has been the focus of my life’s study, so it is to the cause of these families and friends and this humbly heartfelt film that I add my name. I’m grateful and, again, very relieved to join with them in profound sorrow for their loss and to be a part of speaking their unspeakable truth.

I don’t suppose or pretend to know who or how or why this thing was done. But I feel it must begin with one step. NIST, our National Institute of Standards and Technology, must be brought to account for lying to all of us.

For the most part there is no narrator in “The Unspeakable.” The characters — survivors — speak for themselves, like the characters in George V. Higgins’s novel, “The Friends of Eddie Coyle.”* As an ex-prosecutor, Higgins knew criminals when he saw them and knew crime. The crimes he was concerned with in court had been investigated.

To the extent that “The Unspeakable” has a narrator, it is Robert Griffin, a psychologist who lives in Philadelphia. Below are his words. I’ll add more of them as the week goes by. — MCM

–   –   –

Prior to 9/11, I was involved in activism, in a United Nations group, and the idea was that we would work, like the United States, on an international level.

So when 9/11 happened, and the subsequent change in atmosphere, it was really hard to speak about anything that made sense, publicly. Because it was kind of a unilateral United States world, and it was going to be violent, and it was going to be warlike.

Some people go through the trauma of their loss, and then also go through the trauma of finding out that things aren’t as they seemed, or that there’s problems that hurt in other ways. So the trauma is initially disorienting. Like, how do we fit in the world anymore. Am I a father? Am I a son?

[Of Bob McIlvaine, whose son Bobby was killed in the North Tower of the World Trade Center] He has grown over the years . . .

Whose grief is it? Whose loss is it? In some ways, the government has claimed the loss as their own. Folks were told how to feel, what to think about it. And it adds to their pain when it’s used for other types of policies that have nothing to do with it.

Conflict is a part of our nature. We have a way of identifying the United States vs. ‘them’ or ‘the other.’ And so that leads to all sorts of problems, where ‘the other’ is not considered in there as fully human. Beause it’s hard to get people to fight wars. People don’t hate on their own; they have to be given a story To go to war people need a story.

–   –   –

* The book should be on most library shelves or available through bookstores. The 1973 movie starred Robert Mitchum and Peter Boyle.

A Movie Review

This remarkable film gets its name, directly or indirectly, from the Trappist monk Thomas Merton.The Unspeakable, he wrote in 1962, “is the void that contradicts everything that is spoken even before the words are said; the void that gets into the public and official declarations at the very moment when they are pronounced, and makes them ring dead with the hollowness of the abyss.”

James W. Douglass borrowed the term for the title of his 2008 book JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, about the assassination of President Kennedy. Everyone should read that book, and everyone should see this movie, for they are essentially about the same thing: the behind-the-scenes violent usurping of power by already powerful forces and the widespread self-silencing that takes place among millions of people who know perfectly well that they are living and perpetuating a lie. In the cases of Kennedy’s murder in November 1963 and the mass murders of September 2001, official commissions were set up to cover up what actually happened and divert public attention, in both cases with the silent compliance of the mass media.

When silent movies gave way to those with sound, around 1930, the new ones were called talkies. “The Unspeakable” is a talky playing in the land of the silent.

This 90-minute documentary directed by Dylan Avery is having its world premier this week on innumerable screens, none in movie theaters. It was released online in a country that has been largely silenced — so far — on the appalling facts of the mass murders on “9/11”; these facts differ from the mainstream mythology of what happened, so silence is called for.

“The Unspeakable” features 16 survivors of four individuals killed on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, when the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed. Three of the victims were working there; one was apparently taking a short cut through the lobby of the North Tower. In all, thousands were killed including hundreds of responders who died on that day or have died since from exposure to toxins in the rubble.

The crime was unspeakable, but survivors are speaking.

“Normally when you have a family member who has been murdered you call the police and the police do an investigation,” says Matt Campbell, whose younger brother Geoff was killed when the first Tower collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001. “I trust the authorities to be thorough and to be fair and to get to the truth, and you don’t have to go and petition.”

The petition he refers to is to a coroner’s court in the United Kingdom. It is an appeal, based on evidence obtained since the court’s initial decision. The family seeks a new investigation of Geoff’s death. For its first ruling, Matt Campbell estimates, the court had spent only a few minutes considering the cause.

In “The Unspeakable,” three Campbells speak: Maureen, Geoff’s mother; Matt; and his younger brother, Rob. In addition, Henry Young, a colleague of Geoff’s who had been in touch with him by email that morning (New York time), and Ian Henshall, a former journalist-turned-coffeehouse proprietor.

In all, the movie features 16 survivors of Geoffrey Campbell, Robert G. McIlvane, Jean C. DiPalma, and Francis  A. “Frank” DiMartini, who all perished at the World Trade Center that day. Only eight of the 16 are directly related, by marriage or blood. The other eight are survivors in the sense of being colleagues, friends, or individuals who have paid close attention to the nature of the WTC building collapses and the coverup that has followed.

The official “9/11” mythology is (1) that the Twin Towers came down from a combination of the impact of two hijacked commercial airliners striking them; (2) that the Pentagon outside of Washington, D.C., was struck by a third hijacked commercial airliner; (3) that a fourth hijacked commercial airliner crashed into a field in rural Shanksville, Pa., after passengers overcame hijackers intending to fly the craft into another target; and (4) a third WTC skyscraper, Building 7, caught fire from debris from the north Tower and collapsed because of fires that weakened key supporting beams

All 16 who speak in “The Unspeakable” are survivors in the sense that — as the French newspaper Le Monde put it in a headline on Sept. 12, 2001 — “We Are All Americans.” That makes everyone in the world survivors, whether we are “truthers” or not. Everyone should consider reading that page 1 story in the French daily or a translation (I haven’t yet) because history for everyone in the world has been affected, including for the roughly one-quarter of the U.S. population born since those terror attacks.

The faces and voices of at least seven of those who speak in the film will be familiar to some who have seen other documentaries challenging the official “9/11” narrative. One in particular, the dogged Bob McIlvaine, may have been overexposed.

What is absent in this film is one of the best things about it: scenes of the three WTC skyscrapers coming down, post-impact scenes outside the Pentagon, the gouged field in Pennsylvania. People are sick and tired of seeing them. More important, they are about the past. “The Unspeakable” is about the future, the continuing quest for truth and justice.

“The Unspeakable” opens with views of the ironically dubbed “Freedom Tower,” an apparent steel shaft of 94 stories that opened as One World Trade Center in 2015 after eight years of construction. It closes with architect Tony Szamboti saying why he has focused on 9/11 matters: “It’s the right thing to do.”

In all, this is a most moving and vital and important and exceptional movie. I hope to have more to say about it, and to correct any incorrect details above, but this is enough for now.Click HERE to see it.

— Mark Channing Miller

The Berkshire Eagle invited subscribers, HERE, to submit their recollections of the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and how the attacks shaped their lives. The newspaper used 20 of them, in addition to publishing longer articles about others’ experiences. Below is what I sent in, just under the maximum word count specified in the invitation. The headline is theirs. — MCM

–   –   –

Where were you on Sept. 11? Eagle readers recall that dreadful day.

I was at UMass/Amherst that Tuesday morning. My wife, pregnant with our first child, had planned to read in the Labor Center’s library while I was in two classes.

There were no classes. We joined about 20 other students at the Center clustered around a TV screen on the wall watching — over and over — as what was described as a commercial jetliner slammed into one of the Twin Towers. Then another into the other Tower. From high up in one or the other, tiny figures leaped from fire inside to their deaths below.

Everyone was stunned. Shocked and awestruck. Terrorized. In memory, the repeated reports are a blur of dusty terror and heroism and confusion. Did we see the two buildings collapse then, or later? On the car radio driving home we must have heard news reports of the attack at the Pentagon.

We absorbed the horror, believing officials’ narratives and following their decisions. Years later after reading David Ray Griffin’s first book on the attacks, “The New Pearl Harbor,” I began questioning it all.

A growing number of scientists, engineers, architects, demolition experts, and military and “intelligence community” analysts have challenged the Executive Branch line but have been mostly ignored by the news media.

In 2018 a friend and I walked across Massachusetts from Provincetown to the New York border wearing “9/11 TRUTH” signs, to largely positive response from people along the way. Now I do a blog on the subject.

— Mark Channing Miller  

Through an oversight the other day I neglected to find the first of Leland Teschler’s two columns in Design World magazine disparaging the conclusion of some engineers that the Twin Towers and a third skyscraper, Building 7, at the World Trade Center could not have come down as they did on Sept. 11, 2001, for the reasons stated in two National Institute of Standards & Technology reports — the weakening of steel beams caused by office fires ignited at the Twin Towers by burning fuel from the two planes that crashed into them and subsequent damage of Building 7 caused by the North Tower’s collapse sufficient to ignite decisive fires there — but rather that they must have been brought down through a process of controlled demolition effected by carefully timed explosions of pre-planted explosives of some kind.

HERE is that first Design World column by Teschler on the subject. It appeared in April 2020 under the headline “What 9/11 truthers do during a pandemic.” His second column, this month, elicited a letter of reply by Roland Angle, the new CEO at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Both were discussed, HERE, last week by Angle and host Andy Steele on the program “9/11 Free Fall.”

As of yesterday or today, Teschler is no longer mentioned on Design World’s website. He was previously described on it as one of two executive editors.

— Mark Channing Miller

Two engineers’ recent opposing pieces of writing, HERE and HERE, related to the skyscraper collapses at the World Trade Center 20 years go last month might open the possibility of a colloquium on the subject.

The engineers are Roland Angle, new CEO of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and Leland Teschler, an executive editor at the trade publication Design World aimed at mechanical and electrical engineers.* They would make good participants on a panel to discuss whether the Twin Towers and Building 7 came down because of jet fuel and office fires, or because of pre-planted explosives timed to collapse them into their own footprints.

As noted HERE last weekend, Teschler, wrote an article in DW regarded as a “hit piece” by some at AE911Truth. It was headlined “The WTC collapse after 20 years.” He begins by noting “introspection the [9/11] tragedy has brought about in construction engineering.”

He cites the views of Arizona State University Professor Bargin Mobasher, who uses “the World Trade Center collapse” “to illustrate principles of failure mechanics” in a senior-level course in structural design, and to “show why engineers must adopt conservative design practices.”

Teschler writes that Mobasher disparages “spurious claims from 9/11 truthers who believe conspiracy theories about demolition of the WTC buildings.”

Mobasher: “When you look at the amount of misinformation out there, engineers and people skilled in the discipline have a responsibility to argue on behalf of science. I tell my students they are obligated to speak the truth about the WTC if they find themselves in a discussion. They know the charts and graphs that explain steel’s behavior, so they have a responsibility as an engineer to not just be silent when somebody throws mud at scientific ideas.”

Not long after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the professor says, “four or five people … wanted me to comment or support their theories. In those cases I would try to find out if they understood mechanics or materials. If they really didn’t understand, I would tell them they need to communicate in mathematical terms in ways people understand. There is nothing emotional about it. It is all about how the numbers work out.”

Mobasher continues: “There is a lot of data cherry picking. Science doesn’t work that way. The idea that demolition was involved is total nonsense. The studies of WTC5 give a clear explanation of why that building collapsed.”

(Building 5 is usually not mentioned by critics of the U.S. government’s Executive Branch accounts of the building collapses at the World Trade Center, who focus on the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7. Building 5, according to Wikipedia, “was heavily damaged as a result of the collapse of the North Tower during the September 11 attacks and was later demolished.”)

Writing in Design World, Teschler notes that the architects and engineers who signed the AE911Truth petition because they “feel” pre-planted explosives could have brought about the collapses of WTC Buildings 1, 2 and 7 constitute a tiny percentage of those in the United States, and that the civil engineers who signed (like Angle) were only a fraction of the total number of engineers signing.

When Teschler was an undergraduate (at the University of Michigan), he recalls, one could get a bachelor’s degree in engineering “with an exposure to static analysis that was limited to freshman and sophomore physics.” Some of the signers, he concludes, might learn “from auditing a structural steel design course of the type taught by Prof. Mobasher.”

In a colloquium on the destruction of WTC Buildings 1, 2 and 7,  Professor Mobasher, or someone he recommends, could explain why the idea that controlled demolition brought down Buildings 1, 2 and 7 is unscientific and nonsensical.

And Angle, or someone he recommends, possibly J. Leroy Hulsey,** professor emeritus of structural engineering at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, could defend the hypothesis that planned controlled demolition brought them down on Sept. 11, 2001.

— Mark Channing Miller

–   –   –

* Design World is a network of websites, online services and print publications aimed at mechanical and electrical engineers, with a monthly print circulation of more than 40,000 copies and online versions that reach an additional 100,000 readers.

** Hulsey is featured in the film “SEVEN,” about the four-year study he and two graduate students at the UAF conducted on the Building 7 collapse on the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2001. A five-minute summary of “SEVEN” appeared on a number of PBS stations. An abstract of the final report, linked to the report itself, is available HERE.

A thought-provoking conversation on detecting and educating about propaganda follows at https://www.bitchute.com/video/DKt98gJbkKIa/ .

Mark Crispin Miller, NYU professor of communications and publisher of the online News From Underground, is James Corbett’s guest on CorbettReport.com and #solutionswatch. Their talk is titled “How to Disarm Propaganda.”

Although both are longtime 9/11 truthers, they don’t touch specifically on propagandizing about the September 2001 terror attacks. Here they look askance at, among other things, the worldwide Covid-19 vaccination drive and at by-now commonly accepted views of global warming and climate change.

— Mark Channing Miller

The relatively low-key civil engineer Roland Angle has succeeded architect Richard Gage as president of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth following Gage’s removal by the organization’s board of directors shortly before the 20th anniversary of the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

(Some of Gage’s views expressed in the final segment of Spike Lee’s documentary minseries for HBO, “NYC Epicenters: 9/11 – 2021½,” and subsequent predictable news-media outrage [see HERE] had resulted in Lee’s shortening the segment, embarrassing AE911Truth, and lessening its hoped-for anniversary bump.)

As noted over the weekend (HERE), Angle spoke with 9/11 Free Fall* host Andy Steele for half an hour last week. Headlined “Engineer Roland Angle: The official 9/11 narrative cannot be allowed to stand,” the interview was intended in part to refute what Steele termed a “hit piece” in a publication called Design World, and in part to give Angle some more exposure as AE911Truth’s new leader. He previously appeared in the organization’s documentary “Experts Speak Out” (HERE) and has headed its ongoing Project Due Diligence effort to attract support from engineers.

Once introduced by Steele, Angle gave this account of his background:

”I graduated from Cal in ’64, and I had majored in civil engineering, very excellent school, excellent instructors at that time. I was in the honor society, Chi Epsilon Engineering Society, and after I graduated, I joined the army and was trained in special forces. I joined the 19the Special Forces Group. And during that training, one of the things that I was trained in was the use of explosives. We were using C4 plastic explosives, teaching us how to disable vehicles and structures using the explosives at strategic points in their structure.

”After I got out of the army, I went to work for the Los Angeles County Flood Control District, and I was working on their flood control structures, large canals, worked on the Carson Canal and also with their concrete inverts and structures that they were placing at that time to ensure that the Los Angeles Basin was not inundated with floods as they had been in the past. They have quite an extensive flood control system there.

”So, after I left the Flood Control District, I went to work for the Ralph and Parsons Company, and they were the contractors that designed the launch control facilities for the Minuteman missile system. So I was a field engineer at first, went to the air bases where the missile silos and launch control facilities were being constructed in North and South Dakota and Montana.

”And after that, I came back home. My son was born, and I decided to go into teaching, and I left engineering, for the time being, went into teaching high school students the subjects of mathematics, physics, drafting, and the trades that were involved in construction. And after I finished that stint, I went back to engineering, worked for an engineering firm in Marin County, and we did a lot of development works, laying out development, subdivisions, all the infrastructure that was associated with that, roads retaining walls, train systems, and so on.

“And then I went to work for Jordan Woodman Dobson, which was an architectural engineering firm. And Mike Jordan has designed about half of the cargo cranes in the world. And so I got a good education there with the facilities for loading and unloading cargo ships, terminal facilities.

”And then I left that firm and formed my own construction company with a partner. And we did mostly light commercial and construction remodels. And after five years, he went into business with his daughter. I continued on, formed a corporation, small corporation and operated in Southern and Northern California and Nevada.

”Then when the crash hit in 2008 and pretty much all work stopped in my area. And I closed the corporation down, went to work for myself as a sole proprietor and ran that business until 2015, when I closed it and retired.

“And at that time, I came on board with the Board at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, sat on the board and have since then until Richard left earlier this year. And the board asked me to assume the position of CEO, which I have agreed to do.”

— Mark Channing Miller

–   –   –

* 9/11 Free Fall is a division of AE911Truth itself.