The photo is of an internationally known professional who was watching the construction of the World Trade Center from day one:
David A. Johnson, B.Arch, MCP (City Planning), PhD (Regional Planning), F.AICP – Internationally recognized architect and city and regional planner. Professor Emeritus, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Tennessee. Former Professor and Chair of the Planning Departments at Syracuse University and Ball State University. Elected Fellow, American Institute of Certified Planners (2004). Past President of the Fulbright Association of the United States. Recipient of five Fulbright Scholarships for continued education in Cyprus, India, Thailand, and the Soviet Union. Directed educational projects in Brazil and Portugal. Active in reconstruction efforts in Bosnia and bicommunal peace-making in Cyprus. Former professional planner on the staffs of the Washington National Capital Planning Commission and the Regional Plan Association of New York. Former editorial board member of the Journal of the American Planning Association. Author of numerous journal articles on urban and regional planning theory and history. Author of Planning the Great Metropolis (1996). Co-author of The TVA Regional Planning and Development Program (2005). Contributing author to Two Centuries of American Planning (1988).(Mr. David Johnson). There are millions of Americans who agree with him when he says:
"I was dubious of the official explanations from the outset. You see, as a professional city planner in New York, I knew those buildings and their design. I attended and participated in the hearings at the New York City Hall when the buildings were first proposed. I argued for the buildings on the basis that the interior core represented a way of internalizing the cost of mass transit, which in our system is almost impossible to finance through public bond issues.(D.A. Johnson Comments). The two top commissioners say this in their book:
So I was well aware of the strength of the core with its steel columns, surrounding the elevators, and stairwells. I should also mention that with a degree in architecture and instruction in steel design (my Yale professor had worked on the Empire State Building) I was and am no novice in structural design.
When I saw the rapid collapse of the towers, I knew that they could not come down the way they did without explosives and the severing of core columns at the base. The spewing of debris from the towers where the planes entered also could not have occurred simply with just a structural collapse. Something else was happening to make this occur.
Moreover, the symmetrical collapse is strong evidence of a controlled demolition. A building falling from asymmetrical structural failure would not collapse so neatly, nor so rapidly, as you have pointed out.
What we are faced with is a lie of such proportions that even to suggest it makes one subject to ridicule and scorn. Who could have done such a terrible thing? Certainly not our government or military. Rogue elements in the intelligence agencies? I have no idea.
But I do know that the official explanation doesn't hold water. An open, honest re-opening of the case is in order. A near majority of Americans agrees with this view. Let us keep pressing for an honest investigation."
Fog of war could explain why some people were confused on the day of 9/11, but it could not explain why all of the after-action reports, accident investigations and public testimony by FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue ...(SFgate, CBS NEWS, emphasis added). The official who actually wrote the 9\11 report no longer believes it was truthful enough:
“At some level of government,” says Dean Farmer, “at some point in time, a decision was made not to tell the truth about the national response to the attacks on the morning of 9/11. We owe the truth to the families of the victims of 9/11. We owe it to the American public as well, because only by understanding what has gone wrong in the past can we assure our nation’s safety in the future.”(Ground Truth, John Farmer, emphasis added). The U.S. main stream media owned by large military connected corporations let the people be lied to and swallowed the erroneous commission report whole without even chewing it.
NOTE TO U.S. Main Stream Journalists: you still believe the old official conspiracy theory because your system of being informed is known as the deceit business, and it works quite well to feed you all the pabulum you need to stay in your comfort zone.
But like a person freezing to death who takes off his clothes in the final delusional effort "to stay warm", you ain't got game.
Get a little Canadian in your fear filled hearts U.S. MSM.
UPDATE: If you want to know why the MSM is chicken hearted and cannot say that the government's 9/11 story is in fact one conspiracy theory ("bad guys conspired to do thus and such"), read this firestorm of an article that has caused a "bigga badda boom" in blogdom.
UPDATE 2: The San Francisco Chronicle has scrubbed its article linked to in this post above. I wrote the webmaster to ask that they be reinstated.
The Wikipedia article has also suffered a broken link (since the Chronicle scrubbed its site) since I posted this post, most likely by a government agent if their past history is any indicator.
So, I added the CBS News links to the quote above.
A link to a St. Louis newspaper also has this:
John Farmer served as senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission. Early in "The Ground Truth," his examination of the terrorist attacks, he writes that the commission "discovered that what had occurred that morning — that is, what government and military officials had told Congress, the Commission, the media, and the public about who knew what when — was almost entirely, and inexplicably, untrue."(St. Louis Today). I will try to find the articles the San Francisco scrubbed, and re link to it.
He continues: "At some level of the government, at some point in time … there was a decision not to tell the truth about what happened."