25A017 A Demolition of MIHOP by Jim Davies, 4/29/2025

Surprisingly after two dozen years, there is still a hot controversy swirling around the outrage of September 11th 2001. Some accept the government's official narrative of an unexpected, surprise attack; some suspect it was complicit in helping it take place, and others insist that the FedGov micromanaged the whole thing including the placement of explosives to bring down the WTC towers. The latter group splinters into several factions, according to details of their theory - as far as those details go.

You may have spotted it already, but I recently figured out why that third view cannot be correct; and that the key concerns Building 7.

As if in triumph, those folk (believers collectively in MIHOP, or that the Feds "Made It Happen On Purpose") point to the fact that WTC-7 was a 47-floor tower built to a conventional design with a strong steel lattice supporting and interlocking every floor, was the first such structure ever to fall into its own footprint due to fire. Thick steel girders just do not melt at the temperatures prevailing. Therefore, they say, it must have been demolished by explosive charges set in the preceding weeks.

So far, so fair; that does take a lot of explaining. This NIST report shows the best the Feds could do, and it's a stretch. However, that very fact knocks MIHOP clean out of the ring.

Reason: suppose arguendo that MIHOP is correct: that the US Government really did plan and execute 9/11 (for why, see below) in complete detail. We all watched the collapse of WTC-1 and -2, which were built to a quite different design, and it's easy to understand that when a heavy, fast plane has destroyed the support structure of a tall building, it is very likely to collapse, pancake fashion even without dozens of explosives on every floor to speed its descent. There are several examples of that in as many countries, and in the case of these two towers the main support was on their exterior. So the shock value of the attacks was achieved right then, after WTC-2 fell. The US public was convinced that evil people had wantonly attacked the homeland and needed to be found and taken out. The Feds were free to pass their infamous "Patriot Act" and wage their wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, without much homeland protest. Objective accomplished.

Then in that case, why bother bringing down WTC-7? Again assuming all three were actually brought down by controlled demolition, it was easy to deceive the public with regard to WTC-1 and -2, but very difficult to do so for WTC-7. So why did the Feds make it hard for themselves?

My answer: they didn't. This kills MIHOP. Government may be dumb, but it's not stupid.

Now, none of the above says the fingerprints of the Feds were not all over 9/11. Indeed they were; they most certainly caused it. Even if they were completely unaware of when, where and from whom the attacks were coming, they caused it by decades of interference in the Middle East, which had enraged the Muslim zealots who live there. Half a century of foreign-policy meddling was the reason why 9/11 took place, and that was obvious to me as early as the end of September 2001 when I put on the Net this brief summary. That's still valid now, and shows why 9/11 took place.

That being so, it doesn't much matter which theory, in the first paragraph above, is correct. My preference is for the second, known as LIHOP (the L is for "Let") for it that explains why it was so easy for twenty radical Muslims to gain entry to the US and to aviation schools that trained them to fly modern airliners; and why, when the alarm was sounded on 9/11/01 the US Air Force was "scrambled" yet not ordered to shoot down any of the four planes en route to their targets. True, that can be explained by incompetence rather than malice, but it would be surprising also if, with its very extensive network of spies, infiltrators and agents provocateurs, the CIA was totally unaware of the preparations being made, given also that the WTC had already been targeted by Muslims in 1993.

It's therefore really too bad that even now, most of the 9/11 discussion is about which of the three theories applies, instead of on the glaring fact that the disaster was most certainly caused by the very outfit that is supposed to defend Americans: government. Some claim that its very raison d'être is to provide defense, or safety, that that is its reason for existing. Since, here, it provided the very opposite, its existence ought to cease. Here's how.