Why I Don’t Speak of 9/11 Anymore

by Edward Curtin


Tuesday, September 11, 2001, was a non-teaching day for me. I was home when the phone rang at 9 A.M. It was my daughter, who was on a week’s vacation with her future husband. “Turn on the TV,” she said. “Why?” I asked. “Haven’t you heard? A plane hit the World Trade Tower.”
I turned the TV on and watched a plane crash into the Tower. I said, “They just showed a replay.” She quickly corrected me, “No, that’s another plane.” And we talked as we watched in horror, learning that it was the South Tower this time. Sitting next to my daughter was my future son-in-law; he had not had a day off from work in a year. He had finally taken a week’s vacation so they could go to Cape Cod. He worked on the 100th floor of the South Tower. By chance, he had escaped the death that claimed 176 of his co-workers.
That was my introduction to the attacks. Sixteen years have disappeared behind us, yet it seems like yesterday. And yet again, it seems like long, long ago.
Over the next few days, as the government and the media accused Osama bin Laden and 19 Arabs of being responsible for the attacks, I told a friend that what I was hearing wasn’t believable; the official story was full of holes. It was a reaction that I couldn’t fully explain, but it set me on a search for the truth. I proceeded in fits and starts, but by the fall of 2004, with the help of the extraordinary work of David Ray Griffin (see How Bush And Cheney Ruined America And The World) and other early skeptics, I could articulate the reasons for my initial intuition. I set about creating a college course on what had come to be called 9/11.
But I no longer refer to the events of that day by those numbers. Let me explain why.
By 2004 I was convinced that the U.S. government’s claims (and The 9/11 Commission Report) were fictitious. They seemed so blatantly false that I concluded the attacks were a deep-state intelligence operation whose purpose was to initiate a national state of emergency to justify wars of aggression, known euphemistically as “the war on terror.” The sophistication of the attacks, and the lack of any proffered evidence for the government’s claims, suggested that a great deal of planning had been involved.
Yet I was chagrined and amazed by so many people’s insouciant lack of interest in researching arguably the most important world event since the assassination of President Kennedy. I understood the various psychological dimensions of this denial, the fear, cognitive dissonance, etc., but I sensed something else as well. For so many people their minds seemed to have been “made up” from the start. I found that many young people were the exceptions, while most of their elders dared not question the official narrative. This included many prominent leftist critics of American foreign policy. Now that sixteen years have elapsed, this seems truer than ever.
So with the promptings of people like Graeme MacQueen, Lance deHaven-Smith, T.H. Meyer, et al., I have concluded that a process of linguistic mind-control was in place before, during, and after the attacks. As with all good propaganda, the language had to be insinuated over time and introduced through intermediaries. It had to seem “natural” and to flow out of events, not to precede them. And it had to be repeated over and over again.
In summary form, I will list the language I believe “made up the minds” of those who have refused to examine the government’s claims about the September 11 attacks and the subsequent anthrax attacks.

Pearl Harbor. As pointed out by David Ray Griffin and others, this term was used in September 2000 in The Project for the New American Century’s report, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (p.51). Its neo-con authors argued that the U.S. wouldn’t be able to attack Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. “absent some catastrophic event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” Coincidentally or not, the film Pearl Harbor, made with Pentagon assistance and a massive budget, was released on May 25, 2001 and was a box office hit. It was in the theatres throughout the summer. The thought of the attack on Pearl Harbor (not a surprise to the U.S. government, but presented as such) was in the air despite the fact that the 60th anniversary of that attack was not until December 7, 2001, a more likely release date. Once the September 11 attacks occurred, the Pearl Harbor comparison was “plucked out” of the social atmosphere and used innumerable times, beginning immediately. Even George W. Bush was widely reported to have had the time that night to allegedly use it in his diary. The examples of this comparison are manifold, but I am summarizing, so I will skip giving them. Any casual researcher can confirm this.
Homeland. This strange un-American term, another WW II word associated with another enemy – Nazi Germany – was also used many times by the neo-con authors of “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” I doubt any average American referred to this country by that term before. Of course it became the moniker for The Department of Homeland Security, marrying home with security to form a comforting name that simultaneously and unconsciously suggests a defense against Hitler-like evil coming from the outside. Not coincidentally, Hitler introduced it into the Nazi propaganda vernacular at the 1934 Nuremberg rally. Both usages conjured up images of a home besieged by alien forces intent on its destruction; thus preemptive action was in order.
Ground Zero. This is a third WWII (“the good war”) term first used at 11:55 A.M. on September 11 by Mark Walsh (aka “the Harley Guy” because he was wearing a Harley-Davidson tee shirt) in an interview on the street by a Fox News reporter, Rick Leventhal. Identified as a Fox free-lancer, Walsh also explained the Twin Towers collapse in a precise, well-rehearsed manner that would be the same illogical and anti-scientific explanation later given by the government: “mostly due to structural failure because the fire was too intense.” Ground zero – a nuclear bomb term first used by U.S. scientists to refer to the spot where they exploded the first nuclear bomb in New Mexico in 1945 – became another meme adopted by the media that suggested a nuclear attack had occurred or might in the future if the U.S. didn’t act. The nuclear scare was raised again and again by George W. Bush and U.S. officials in the days and months following the attacks, although nuclear weapons were beside the point. But the conjoining of “nuclear” with “ground zero” served to raise the fear factor dramatically. Ironically, the project to develop the nuclear bomb was called the Manhattan Project and was headquartered at 270 Broadway, NYC, a few short blocks north of the World Trade Center.
The Unthinkable. This is another nuclear term whose usage as linguistic mind control and propaganda is analyzed by Graeme MacQueen in the penultimate chapter of the very important The 2001 Anthrax Deception. He notes the patterned use of this term before and after September 11, while saying “the pattern may not signify a grand plan …. It deserves investigation and contemplation.” He then presents a convincing case that the use of this term couldn’t be accidental. He notes how George W. Bush, in a major foreign policy speech on May 1, 2001, “gave informal public notice that the United States intended to withdraw unilaterally from the ABM Treaty”; Bush said the U.S. must be willing to “rethink the unthinkable.” This was necessary because of terrorism and rogue states with “weapons of mass destruction.” PNAC also argued that the U.S. should withdraw from the treaty. A signatory to the treaty could only withdraw after giving six months notice and because of “extraordinary events” that “jeopardized its supreme interests.” Once the September 11 attacks occurred, Bush rethought the unthinkable and officially gave formal notice on December 13 to withdraw the U.S. from the ABM Treaty. MacQueen specifies the many times different media used the term “unthinkable” in October 2001 in reference to the anthrax attacks. He explicates its usage in one of the anthrax letters – “The Unthinkabel” [sic]. He explains how the media that used the term so often were at the time unaware of its usage in the anthrax letter since that letter’s content had not yet been revealed, and how the letter writer had mailed the letter before the media started using the word. He makes a rock solid case showing the U.S. government’s complicity in the anthrax attacks and therefore in the Sept 11 attacks. While calling the use of the term “unthinkable” in all its iterations “problematic,” he writes, “The truth is that the employment of ‘the unthinkable’ in this letter, when weight is given both to the meaning of this term in U.S. strategic circles and to the other relevant uses of the term in 2001, points us in the direction of the U.S. military and intelligence communities.” I am reminded of Orwell’s point in 1984: “a heretical thought – that is, a thought diverging from the principles of Ingsoc – should be literally unthinkable, at least as far as thought is dependent on words.” Thus the government and media’s use of “unthinkable” becomes a classic case of “doublethink.” The unthinkable is unthinkable.

9/11. This is the key usage that has reverberated down the years around which the others revolve. It is an anomalous numerical designation applied to an historical event, and obviously also the emergency telephone number. Try to think of another numerical appellation for an important event in American history. The future editor of The New York Times and Iraq war promoter, Bill Keller, introduced this connection the following morning in a NY Times op-ed piece, “America’s Emergency Line: 911.” The linkage of the attacks to a permanent national emergency was thus subliminally introduced, as Keller mentioned Israel nine times and seven times compared the U.S. situation to that of Israel as a target for terrorists. His first sentence reads: “An Israeli response to America’s aptly dated wake-up call might well be, ‘Now you know.’” By referring to September 11 as 9/11, an endless national emergency became wedded to an endless war on terror aimed at preventing Hitler-like terrorists from obliterating us with nuclear weapons that could create another ground zero or holocaust. It is a term that pushes all the right buttons evoking unending social fear and anxiety. It is language as sorcery; it is propaganda at its best. Even well-respected critics of the U.S. government’s explanation use the term that has become a fixture of public consciousness through endless repetition. As George W. Bush would later put it as he connected Saddam Hussein to “9/11” and pushed for the Iraq war, “We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” All the ingredients for a linguistic mind-control smoothie had been blended.

I have concluded – and this is impossible to prove definitively at this time because of the nature of such propagandistic techniques – that the use of all these words/numbers is part of a highly sophisticated linguistic mind-control campaign waged to create a narrative that has lodged in the minds of hundreds of millions of people and is very hard to dislodge. It is why I don’t speak of “9/11” any more. I refer to those events as the attacks of September 11, 2001, which is a mouth-full and not easily digested in the age of Twitter and texting. But I am not sure how to be more succinct or how to undo the damage.
Lance deHaven-Smith puts it well in Conspiracy Theory in America.

The rapidity with which the new language of the war on terror appeared and took hold; the synergy between terms and their mutual connections to WW II nomenclatures; and above all the connections between many terms and the emergency motif of “9/11” and “9-1-1” – any one of these factors alone, but certainly all of them together – raise the possibility that work on this linguistic construct began long before 9/11….It turns out that elite political crime, even treason, may actually be official policy.

Needless to say, his use of the words “possibility” and “may” are in order when one sticks to strict empiricism. However, when one reads his full text, it is apparent to me that he considers these “coincidences” part of a conspiracy. I have also reached that conclusion. As Thoreau put in his underappreciated humorous way, “Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.”
The evidence for linguistic mind control, while the subject of this essay, does not stand alone, of course. It underpins the actual attacks of September 11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks that are linked. The official explanations for these events by themselves do not stand up to elementary logic and are patently false, as proven by thousands of well-respected professional researchers from all walks of life – i.e. engineers, pilots, architects, and scholars from many disciplines. To paraphrase the prescient Vince Salandria, who said it long ago concerning the assassination of President Kennedy, the attacks of 2001 are “a false mystery concealing state crimes.” If one objectively studies the 2001 attacks together with the language adopted to explain and preserve them in social memory, the “mystery” emerges from the realm of the unthinkable and becomes utterable. “There is no mystery.” How to communicate this when the corporate mainstream media serve the function of the government’s mockingbird (as in Operation Mockingbird), repeating and repeating and repeating the same narrative in the same language; that is the difficult task we are faced with, but there are signs today that breakthroughs are occurring.
Words have a power to enchant and mesmerize. Linguistic mind-control, especially when linked to traumatic events such as the September 11 and anthrax attacks, can strike people dumb and blind. It often makes some subjects “unthinkable” and “unspeakable” (to quote Jim Douglass quoting Thomas Merton in JFK and the Unspeakable: the unspeakable “is the void that contradicts everything that is spoken even before the words are said.”).
We need a new vocabulary to speak of these terrible things.

Edward Curtin is a writer whose work has appeared widely. He teaches sociology at Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts. His website is http://edwardcurtin.com/

newest oldest most voted
Notify of
la Cariatide
Reader

the admin admonished me so i’m a little late, mates.
if you have never heard about the undeniable nuclear attack on september 11, 2001′ false flag, here somes sources to read, understand what happened, how it happened.
Heinz Pommer has perhaps the best stance about 9/11. all is backed by sources, hard evidence, physic laws and he is especially not afraid to correct his point of view.
http://www.911history.de/aaannxyz_ch01_en.html
about the hotspots noticed by thermal images from satellites.
http://911research.wtc7.net/papers/dreger/GroundZeroHeat2008_07_10.pdf
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/10/05/911-filling-in-the-map-tracing-the-nukes/
after that, just look at all the pictures of the underground nukes..
https://www.facebook.com/911nucleardemolition/

Michael McNulty
Reader
Michael McNulty

The neo-cons must think America and the world is full of idiots. If the towers didn’t fall according to the laws of physics then they fell either by explosives or magic….and they’re the ones saying it wasn’t explosives.

binra
Reader

Yes – they are certain of it and the inability of the idiots to effect any change is the lack of power to more than commentate some footnotes to their capture of our minds – such as we have left…
For it isn’t what is supposed to have happened so much as who asserts that it did – even though we know it couldn’t have. That knowing is suppressed from full expression by the broad spectrum dominance operating through the event and since.

jaques
Reader
jaques

I believe this is an interesting angel to look at ‘the attacks of September 11’. Once you accept that the entire event was a constructed state manufactured act of terror- a false flag attack- you must also accept that the planning for it began well before the day. But how long before? There is a side stream of 9/11 truth that examines 9/11 in popular culture- before the vent- and this is sometimes referred to as ‘predictive programming’. According to this theory the public was conditioned to accept 9/11 through hidden messages implanted into popular culture over many years prior… Read more »

binra
Reader

During WW2 a mainstream paper crossword contained answer to clues that ‘revealed’ the codewords for then current secret operations. The crossword setter was taken into custody and eventually released. A remote viewer said that for him – things being kept secret shouted out more to be seen. All so called creative imagination receives information from a ‘higher’ mind but often this it is its own invention, discovery or patent. So while it is possible to assign such power to conspirators – and while they may be very grateful for your gift – if they had any awareness of gift beyond… Read more »

binra
Reader

How funny is this – on coming back here – I caught the tail end phrase and responded to it as if to another… I notice this phrase: “of the nature of the mind that generates ‘reality-distortion’ – rather than serving the recognition of reality.” Here have you not the key to Everything? Regardless what your brother currently chooses – the mind or rather the minding (verb) that you choose to align with and embody – or manifest as your own reality-experience – transparent to being of distortions over being – is YOUR current acceptance of ‘self in relation to… Read more »

Inretrospect
Reader
Inretrospect

Perception: Even though the deeds of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ are opposites, reality and circumstance are the factors that will define what is right and wrong in the eyes of the beholder.
Logical observation: The fragile aluminum alloy wings of a Boeing passenger jet cannot cut through steel-reinforced concrete walls (E.g. aluminum scissors won’t cut rock; a hollow-point bullet will not penetrate rock).
Evidence: “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” – Arthur Conan Doyle

jaques
Reader
jaques

the rabbit hole is deep on this one:

flybow
Reader
flybow

Now we have the laughable event in london. LOL

Zabastovshchitsa
Reader
Zabastovshchitsa

The terrifying, conscienceless destruction of the 3 WTC buildings were the US regime’s version of the Reichstag Fire: the manufactured excuse for all the crimes the psychopaths in power have committed since. It was a gift to themselves that just keeps on giving and will do so until we band together to put a stop to it and them.

sabelmouse
Reader
sabelmouse

though they do supplement a little with small staged ”terrorist” even’t. vans instead of planes, that sort of thing.

falcemartello
Reader

It is so obvious that even my neighbours cat knows it was a staged event As I get older I note that western way of thinking is easily manipulated it is scary. Lets look at all the historical events /false flags that have happened in the last 175 yesrs. Lincoln Assisination. Booth Known Rothschild agent. Mickinley Became the head of the Dems Ticket with the Proviso Teddy be his running mate. Teddy was a Rockfellear and Rothchild stooge. Mckinley assisinated by another cbalist agent and viola our man gets in Teddy who then plays his next card trick by busting… Read more »

binra
Reader

Qui bono? – who benefits? Can this opens a way in to seeing differently than separate agents working private agendas from a perspective of private moral judgement or indeed competition. What ‘ideas’ are propagating and strengthening in the mind of energy and attention as a result of the way we see and interpret events? The idea ‘who’ is determined by accepted self-definition. The belief, motivation and appreciation of ‘benefit’ then follows on from what is accepted. Watching the mind is not ‘running within the thinking of the mind’. Because most everyone operates from a sense of who they accept themselves… Read more »

mohandeer
Reader

Reblogged this on Worldtruth.

Lupulco
Reader
Lupulco

A good article on 9/11 One of many on the subject. But the main outcome is TRPTB after getting the mass of the people to first accept this bullshit have now gone on to bigger a better bullshit. Knowing full well that unless one is directly affected nobody is really concerned. The mayhem in the Middle East who really benefits? Countries that had a reasonable living conditions and little or no debt raped? The rise of the migration of 100,000’s of able bodied men [migrants?] to Europe. For what purpose? To destabilise and create chaos? Again who will be the… Read more »

binra
Reader

I see the key issue to this article is the use of imaged symbol and language to ‘spell-bind’ a shocked or unsettled ‘mind’. A ‘shaped charge’ to serve a specified multiple outcome – yet like a booby trapped device – full of deceits and diversions to those seeking to ‘defuse it’. I’m not writing here on the twin towers – but on image, mind, division and conflict. The spell-bound or captured mind has to find willingness to work against its own (false) predicates of power and protection to ‘wake up’ to a true appreciation and discernment of from which true… Read more »

bill
Reader
bill

Just as over JFK where again strangely,or is it, Chomsky serves as an arguably deliberate diversion it would be highly unwise not to recognise that those forces behind this complex plot are not ready to shift the blame elsewhere altogether especially,towards another resources-rich country whilst admitting in consolation of public outcry in an apparent outbreak of honesty they took down T7 for safetys sake …..much was learnt from the Warren Commission Report and sewn into the 9/11 Commission Report…… much of the opposition is itself controlled

Edwige
Reader
Edwige

On the subject of the connections between JFK and the attack on the WTC, I’d point out the strange similarity between the layout of Dealey Plaza and the design on the outer steelwork of the twin towers. Both have a very distinct trident shape that’s difficult to see as being coincidental.

archie1954
Reader

A couple of big questions I had at the time were the strange coincidences that occurred. One being the Secretary of Defense’s press conference the night before 9/11 where he discusses the $2.1 trillion missing within the Pentagon accounts. Secondly the destruction of a portion of the Pentagon that encompassed the accounting department and the records and accountants who were looking for the missing funds. Thirdly the destruction of WTC 7 which held the offices of government accounting and other agencies that were involved in various investigations which may have strayed where their political masters didn’t want them to go.

rtj1211
Reader
rtj1211

They are not coincidences, they are the two key strands of evidence which demonstrate the official line was lying propaganda. No plane hit WTC7, so it had to have been controlled demolition. Experts have shown it to be impossible for a jet airliner to have caused the damage to thevPentagon, much less an inexperienced Arab capable of flying such a precise line to even hit the target. The message is simple: we stole $2.1trn from you, the American taxpayer. We used it in part to plan, finance and execute the events of September 11th 2001. Oh, and by the by,… Read more »

Reg Varney
Reader

Very well put, I agree with every word.

bill
Reader
bill

following JFKs death the powerful Kennedy family even with RFK as A/G Iinstantly realised that it could get nowhere at all against the official narrative so much so that RFK accepted pubicly the findings of the Warren Commission whilst his own murder denied him the power of the Presidency deemed essential for any progress to be even launched, a reason he was assassinated…….Leaders know their huge limitations against the power of the deep state which has already knobbled Trump,that is if they havent already been brainwashed by the own advisors or counselled to stay far away from this subject………..its v… Read more »

manfromatlan
Reader

9/11 still was a seminal moment. Like the question “Where were you when you heard JFK had been assassinated?”, people will think about where they were on 9/11. I went for an early meeting at my son’s school. Stopped at a computer shop on way back. All the monitors were showing replays of the plane flying into the North tower. I had a friend in New York that day. She was going to apply for a job at a modelling agency near by that morning but cancelled. Got through to her and let her family know she was OK. Met… Read more »

Willem
Reader
Willem

Thanks for the post, and for giving the reader a bit of history about your son in law and how that relates to 9/11. Here is another classic word, straight taken out of WWII vocabulary Axis of evil=Country that ‘we’ would like to bomb back to the stone age, for that country’s own good. I can’t speak for others but the reason why I ‘believed’ in 9/11 in 2001 was that I just didn’t care about the truth at the time. 9/11 was televised spectacle, it did not affect me and the video’s from Bin Laden et al, and the… Read more »

Jerry Alatalo
Reader

Sociologist Edward Curtin earns much respect for his relentless loyalty to the truth of 9/11, along with many highly credentialed and equally respected men and women across the Earth. With the recent formation of “Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Inquiry” (www.lcfor911.org), just as Towers 1, 2 and 7 on September 11, 2001 the criminals behind the greatest military false flag operation of the 21st century are about to crash to the ground.

sirgen
Reader

America’s Reichstag fire!

flaxgirl
Reader

It’s funny how they use the term Ground Zero, which refers to the point on the earth closest to detonation of a nuclear or other massive bomb, quite blatantly but they’re not so public about the FBI code name for the events of the day, PENTTBOM (Pentagon Twin Towers Bombing). In fact, the FBI lied to the Jersey Widows, in answer to their question of the significance of BOM, saying it was what they used in all their code names. However, the code name for the anthrax attacks was AMERITHRAX while the Oklahoma Bombing code name was OKBOM. Whether there… Read more »

plexity
Reader

what happened on Sept 11th 1973?

flaxgirl
Reader

Chilean coup d’etat. It’s all in the numbers. Multiples of 11 are important ones (with 11 being the most important) so we have (US style) 11/22 JFK, 9/11 Chile, 9/11 US, 3/22 Brussels, 3/22 Westminster, 5/22 Manchester, etc.

Greg Rzesniowiecki
Reader

Hi and thanks for the very clear rendering of the unspeakable. Certainly is unspeakable for most prominent so-called left opinion leaders.
One would have thought that there were opportunities to be grasped by the revolutionary class warrior leaders.
A lot of Marxists and peace warriors in Aotearoa New Zealand do not want to discuss the September 11 2001 attack on the planet’s inhabitants and noosphere.
I’m as much fascinated by various people’s responses to the 9/11 truth as to the rabbit hole of evidence itself.

wardropper
Reader
wardropper

One of my greatest disappointments in life was to see how Chomsky – a man I greatly admire on pretty much ANY other subject – blatantly denied having a problem with the “official story”, or, at least, basically refused to discuss it. Not that I am sure I would have had the courage, in his prominent shoes, to do otherwise. What disappointed me is the fact that he has already shown great courage in speaking out on all sorts of topics, so I naturally asked myself, “Why not this one…?” I suppose wherever great evil exists, the big question always… Read more »

Tom
Reader
Tom

I too admire much of what Chomsky says, but he has his brand to think about.

archie1954
Reader

Evil triumphs when good people do nothing!

sabelmouse
Reader
sabelmouse

it’s weird indeed. of course many of us have this regarding vaccines. it’s such a taboo and the slightest doubt gets you vilified. chomsky is maybe still sitting to pretty.

Greg Rzesniowiecki
Reader

Gotcha on the Christ logos thing…. the logos = the word = the Law And this post on the linguistics which is the whole of the study of the mind-language complex The thing that the internet did for us was level the playing field a little in democratising some of the tools and intelligence in the functioning monopolist’s empire. Opinion leaders are fine = where they remain true to the causal principle. However they do seem to arrive at the nodal point in the network and thus are targets for corruption, for journalistic opinion leaders such as George Monbiot, it… Read more »

Alan
Reader
Alan

Given the dominance of US propaganda and the continual need to convert all to their culture, it isn’t surprising to read
“…arguably the most important world event since the assassination of President Kennedy…”
What they call 9/11 is akin to a religious cult, an American cult which those beyond their borders don’t necessarily see in the same light.

flaxgirl
Reader

But 9/11 is part of a continuum that crosses the globe. There was Operation Gladio in Italy from post-war until supposedly the 90s, however, since 1997 there’s been Gladio B and however these operations are defined, they’re probably much more octopus-like than we can ever know. 9/11 involved at a minimum, the US, Israel, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia but I’ve read Central Asian countries were also involved. And now we’re being bombarded with false-flag hoaxes in the US, the UK, mainland Europe, Australia, Canada, Turkey and I believe there are false-flag hoaxes in Pakistan, India and the Middle East. When… Read more »

Greg Rzesniowiecki
Reader

Here’s their power – ability to bend the academy to do their bidding – suggesting that major holes in the bath-tub floor were from glacier activity in the past ice-age. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/22/nyregion/22rocks.html Whereas the WTC complex was sited on 8 blocks of the previous “Radio Row” – mixed manufacturing and retail businesses near the port. http://www.vintag.es/2016/09/rare-photographs-from-1966-67-showing.html The excavations for the WTC complex would have involved engineering checks to ensure the 500,000 tonne structures were on something solid – solid granite I thought. Nuclear devices vapourise steel, concrete and basement rock.. not sure what else would. And the illnesses do not add… Read more »