Truth the mainstream media doesn't tell you about
Published on Apr 11, 2013
On April 9th, 2013, Senator John McCain appeared on C-
SPAN's live call-in show, Washington Journal. Identifying myself under a Pseudonym, I asked him the following question:
"The National Institute of Standards and Technology asserts that the collapse of the 47-story World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11 was caused by fire. Yet they acknowledge that the first 100 feet of that collapse took place at free-fall acceleration. Engineers will tell you that fire cannot do this, that the only method by which it can be accomplished is the use of pre-planted explosives.
How do you explain this discrepancy...of a hundred feet of free-fall, without the use of explosives?"
As the video shows, John McCain claimed ignorance, saying, "To tell you the truth, this is an area that I'm not very familiar...and if you would drop me a note and mention that we talked on C-SPAN, I'd be glad to get you a more complete answer. But...honestly, every once in a while I have to plead ignorance about an issue and this is one that I have not been involved in, but I'll be more than happy to look into it..."
John McCain, of course, is not ignorant of 9/11 Truth. He wrote the foreward for the Popular Mechanics book "Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts". In his essay "9/11 Conspiracy Myths: Truth Under Attack" which was adapted from his foreward for Popular Mechanics' book, McCain wrote:
"Any explanation for 9/11 must start and end with the facts. The evidence must be gathered and analyzed. Then—only then—can conclusions be drawn."
Indeed, 100 feet of free-fall acceleration of WTC 7 is a fact, as acknowledged by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which was the government agency tasked with investigating the destruction of the building. NIST was forced to admit to WTC 7's free-fall after physics teacher David Chandler embarrassed the agency at a technical briefing in August of 2008.
As well, NIST has refused requests to disclose the data used to create its computer models for its WTC7 investigation, claiming that doing so would somehow jeopardize public safety.
It's likely that John McCain's plea of ignorance on Washington Journal was in reference to the technical information cited in the question that I asked him and not to 9/11 Truth in general.
In regards to the controversial issue of WTC 7's destruction, he should be quite familiar with the topic.
In 2008 Blair Gadsby-- a religious history professor and constituent of McCain's-- held a hunger strike for 17 days at McCain's Phoenix office after failing to obtain a personal meeting with the Senator to discuss his concerns about the 9/11 crime. Richard Gage, AIA-- CEO and founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth-- offered his immediate availability to Senator McCain to discuss the evidence. Though a member of McCain's staff finally met with Gadsby and other 9/11 activists after nine days into Gadsby's hunger strike, and the staff member was given materials that laid out the evidence of the Twin Towers and Building 7's controlled demolition on 9/11, Senator McCain himself refused to meet with the activists personally, stating in a letter to Gadsby:
"I believe these investigations have been conducted in good faith by qualified experts who have approached this daunting task honestly and objectively. My staff and I are always open to new, scientifically substantiated information that helps explain how and why the tragedies of September 11th occurred. I welcome any additional new information you may wish to present on the subject and will make my staff available to listen to your concerns."
Because NIST's acknowledgement of WTC 7's free-fall took place after McCain wrote those words to Gadsby, it qualifies as the "new, scientifically substantiated information" McCain was seeking. McCain promised on Washington Journal that he would try to answer the question that I asked him. Based on his promise and the existence of the new evidence, John McCain's office should, therefore, be open to a new meeting with supporters of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and a personal re-examination of the evidence.
at least he is right about one thing - he is ignorant .