9/11, 9/11 fifteen years on, latest, video

VIDEO: Stand for the truth – Former NIST employee speak out

In August of 2016, a former employee of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) began looking into the reports his agency had released years earlier on the collapse of the World Trade Center. What he found shook him to the core.

In this half-hour interview, Peter Michael Ketcham tells of his personal journey toward reluctantly concluding his employers of 14 years had deliberately suppressed the truth about the most pivotal event of the 21st century.


  1. Hey there! Quick question that’s totally off topic. Do you know
    how to make your site mobile friendly? My weblog looks weird when browsing from my iphone.

    I’m trying to find a template or plugin that might be able to correct this issue.

    If you have any suggestions, please share. Cheers!

  2. rtj1211 says

    It seems to me that the hypothesis which needs to be falsified is that the collapse of WTCs 1, 2 and 7 was due to controlled demolition.

    The key features of the WTC collapses were:

    Collapse under gravitational acceleration.
    Symmetrical collapse within the footprint of the building.
    Pulverisation of all cement from the building.
    Presence of nano-thermite materials in the rubble.
    Expulsion of large pieces of steel perpendicular to the direction of building collapse.
    Evidence from witnesses concerning loud noises of explosions.

    What are the key features of collapses known to have initiated by nano-thermite explosions?

    If they are pretty much the same, then any falsification needs to prove that the features identical to a controlled demolition were NOT caused by a controlled demolition. Also that the witnesses who heard explosions were, in fact, hearing something quite different, along with evidence that that quite different thing took place.

    If there are any scientists who have become party to a conspiracy, they should thing of all the emergency workers who died on 9/11 doing their jobs with honour, integrity and, if they were sacrificed, with the same fate as WW I soldiers sent to the killing fields of Flanders by callous uncaring leadership.

    Then they should ask if they are really scientists if they can conspire to cover up mass murder……..

  3. I’ve yet to find a site which fully encompasses all the false evidence of the US propaganda fiction of the 9/11 lie and until I do I am doomed to half baked theory on what I believe really happened. If anyone can point me to a full analysis of what really happened, I would be extremely grateful.

    • You just have to be the one that collects all the evidence (yes I know there’s thousands of documents, videos etc). Everyone is expecting everyone else to do it, which is why it never happens.

    • aaronmicalowe says

      Have you tried AE911.truth.org? I haven’t gone there yet but it’s posted at the end of the video.

    • summitflyer says

      You can start here: http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/home.html
      What I have found is that ,if one builds an archive of all the information related to it , coming from the internet ,if you go back to it a few years later it is gone,Can you say Censored ? or scrubbed.
      Try this one it is very recent and a video by Cristopher Bollyn is they have not taken it out already.

    • Well, you and I may not know “who” perpetrated the crime exactly or the “how” in the details of that crime, but I think we can confidently assert that the “planes” and only “fire and gravity” brought down both Towers and WTC7. That isn’t half-baked. That’s solid. Just crawl through the evidence amassed and analysed by “AE for 9/11 Truth” and see where you cannot but end up. But of course you already know that, and for the time being, for people who were not on the inside of the “conspiracy,” that is all that can be known. So really you already know as much as anyone not directly involved and as member of the general public can possibly know. And it’s not negligible, in my opinion. It tells you something about the “regime” under which we live, which is more important, I think, than the “details” of “what really happened on 9/11.” There is no crime that the ruling class will not commit to attain its ends.

      • Manda says

        “There is no crime that the ruling class will not commit to attain its ends.”

        I concur.
        I believe the ‘ruling class’ is not a single monolith though, it has factions, sometimes competing and has control of different levers of power and enforcement, directly or indirectly, that also wax and wane.

        • Of course, yes, it’s not a monolith. What makes it the ruling class is its objectively disproportionate ability to write on the whole the rules and regulation which govern the social, political and economic life of the society in which we live.

          And who would “they” be?

          They are the super-rich, those who deploy monopoly capital, who can buy the politicians or either, being themselves actively engaged, sit in the highest offices in “our” governing institutional bureaucracies, whether private or public (i.e., the giant corporations of whatever stripes and anything to do with a branch of government, be it scientific, educational, economic or a matter of defense, policing or the judiciary).

          Because “money” is the sin qua non of “power” in our society, those who have the most of it, the multi-millionaire and billionaire class (through their bought and paid for armies of lackeys and hacks) is the “ruling class.”

          They have the means and the motive as dictated by the ideology of ‘capital accumulation’ to commit extravagant crimes with impunity.

          And indeed, between and among themselves, there are rivalries and competition. Hence wars. Hence political murders. Hence spectacles such as 9/11. Hence the anthrax scare, just to get everyone who is really in a position of subordination, in case he or she might imagine otherwise, on the same page, eh.

          • Manda says

            I raise my hand to being a pedant in this case but it has enabled you to flesh the picture out.
            I agree and add wealth as well as money. Owning assets, be they property or shares etc. are major generators of Rentier income. Gradually more and more public assets and services are going into private hands, out of any democratic control and adding to the income and wealth inequality and increased ability to control and exploit us all. Of course gaining de facto control of whole countries via government and and or departments is the biggest prize of all. Operations on a huge scale and financialized criminality can be funded and insured by the long suffering tax payer and citizens who are denied or lose public services, infrastructure, lands and income generating assets.

      • “but I think we can confidently assert that the “planes” and only “fire and gravity” brought down both Towers and WTC7.”

        Just to be clear, when I wrote that, what I really meant was that what we can be certain of, is that the planes and fire and gravity DID NOT bring down both Towers and WTC7, eh. I just noticed that glaring ambiguity when I came back to reply to Manda.

    • It wasn’t supposed to be easy ?

      If it was we’d have seen the perpetrators behind bars & you know that will never happen just like JFK…………..

      & how many years is that?

    • Manda says

      At risk of being shouted down (again and as usual when I mention her name) I suggest Dr Judy Wood as one comprehensive scientific attempt to discover what happened with the evidence available to her. She has made at least one legal challenge against NIST which has been kicked into the long grass I understand, There is a you tube video of her speaking about her evidence, method and findings titled ‘Dr. Judy Wood ~ Evidence of Breakthrough Energy on 9/11″.
      I invested in her book which puts her findings in a form most lay people can understand. I find it very interesting and certainly thought provoking.

      • Manda, Judy is either a crackpot or disinfo.

        She has been thoroughly debunked. Let her go and move on to more sensible “evidence-based” analyses.

        Here is something for you to read and think about:

        The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish the World Trade Center Towers – by Dr. Gregory S. Jenkins, Ph.D. Physics Co-author: Matt Sullivan

        And then please have a dispassionate listen to this interview with Wood:


        The untenability of her approach to investigating the events of 9/11 is quite evident. At best, she is unhinged, and at worst she is being paid to spout the bullshit she is spouting. And if you can’t see that what Wood is spouting is out and out crazy, you do not have much of a grasp of even elementary physics. You need to educate yourself in this respect, and no, I ain’t going to be the one to do it. For that, you’re on your own.

        • Manda says

          I don’t believe she is a paid disinfo, crack pot she may be, I don’t have the scientific training or expertise to judge. I don’t find AE 9/11 any better to be honest and gave up on looking at 9/11 stuff years ago.

          I will take the hint and not mention her again though. I saw that video a good while back.
          I will wait and see if anyone ever does anything substantive with their evidence. I don’t expect I will live to see it though.

    • I watched September 11th the New Pearl Harbour available on YT. It’s pretty detailed and provides much food for thought.

  4. bill says

    No explanation of 9/11 which omits serious study of the seismic evidence nor the evidence of the very definite nuclear signature can be remotely satisfying… all the evidence has to be explained and not cherrypicked as part woolly reasoning that if fire /collision didnt do it then conventional explosives must have….

  5. BigB says

    Watched this the other night – Quote of the Week “the NIST report was a Rube Goldberg machine” – Peter Ketcham.
    Watching this again – no one has been, can do, or will ever be able to convince me I am watching a fire collapse. The way that the information/disinformation overload cycle is progressing – sometimes instinct is all I need – but kudos to AE911 Truth for providing the science to back it up. With this and Prof. Hulsey’s WTC 7 Evaluation project, the idea that WTC 7 (at least) was a fire collapse appears as it is – insane and non-sensical.
    Unfortunately, that description fits with the established ruling class and its gatekeepers perfectly.

  6. Matt says

    I question the official narrative but this story doesn’t help, its an appeal to a false authority. The guy is just some guy. He didn’t work on the 9/11 investigation (or any other investigation), and has no background in structural engineering or physics.

    • aaronmicalowe says

      You’re expecting those that worked on the 9/11 investigation to tell the truth!!!???

    • Perhaps your rationale is also a logical fallacy – the sort of inverse of “appeal to a false authority”. It’s not as if what PMK is saying is highly technical. Is there anything you think doesn’t make sense in what he says? You don’t need to be a scientist to recognise that WTC-7 fell by controlled demolition – even the scientists tell you that. That’s why it is probably the most in-your-face case of the Emperor’s New Clothes the world has ever known.

      I’ve realised, to my delight, that I’ve completely snookered the upholders of the Official Conspiracy Theory. I have to say I’m amazed. I posed the following question on Quora and made the invitation to people to answer it and/or debunk my answer to the question. It has rendered the OCTers mum, silent as a tomb. Not a one has gone anywhere near my answer or the question itself, a phenomenon heretofore never witnessed on Quora as far as I know.

      Using videos only and with reference to the cause, can you describe in your own words the process of collapse of WTC-7? https://www.quora.com/Using-videos-only-and-with-reference-to-the-cause-can-you-describe-in-your-own-words-the-process-of-collapse-of-WTC-7.

    • This “Guy” has a Masters in Mathematics & was specialist for NIST for mathematical modelling on the collapse of structures – FACT so why the silly comment ?

      Personally I am a qualified & certified engineer & this guy discusses well known valid points of deep shame that we have lived with the lie of 9/11 for far too many years unable to get the truth out so I salute anyone of Peter Ketcham’s calibre doing just that – suggest you research & find a moral compass?

    • The question is, why aren’t you questioning the message? Why are you questioning the messenger?
      If you’re dying of thirst in the desert and you see a baby baboon, dripping wet, aren’t you going to follow it to see where it got the water?

  7. Congratulations for posting this. And of course thanks to AE911Truth for persisting against all odds in pushing for the truth about what happened on 9/11, the event that allowed the USA and its allies (especially the UK) to go on a rampage under the mendacious banner of the “War on Terror”: in reality a War OF Terror, not only against invented enemies (Osama bin Laden, Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad) but against the general public everywhere.

Comments are closed.