US, international experts to discuss alternative versions of 9/11 attacks
The participants include Scott Bennett, a former US Army intelligence and psychological-operations officer; Susan Lindauer, who describes herself as a former CIA asset; and T. Mark Hightower, a chemical engineer specializing in a class of explosives known as nano-thermites. Fetzer said that for the past 15 years, he has been collecting evidence that supports his contention that the US government played politics before and after the September 11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people. He also stressed that US media outlets did not sufficiently report on unofficial interpretations of the attacks. "From the beginning, reports about 9/11 were tightly controlled by media managers," Fetzer stated. In an online publication "9/11: The Who, the How, and the Why," Fetzer claims, based on his own and US military officials’ research, that the crash sites in New York City and the US states of Virginia and Pennsylvania were fabricated.
In his latest book, "America Nuked on 9/11," Fetzer presents 28 detailed studies asserting that the CIA and the US Department of Defense had prior knowledge of the attacks but let them happen "in order to justify the transformation of U.S. foreign policy." According to Fetzer, planning for the attacks "appears to have originated in the fertile imagination" of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, "who wanted to find a way to draw the US into dismantling the modern Arab states that served as a counter-balance to Israel`s domination of the Middle East.
According to the US government’s official version of events, 19 hijackers, who had pledged allegiance to the al-Qaeda terror group and its leader, Osama bin Laden, intentionally crashed four jumbo jets in New York, at the Pentagon near Washington, DC, and in a Pennsylvania field. Investigations by US federal agencies concluded that fire was the main reason the twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed. However, numerous critics have voiced disagreement that a fire — as opposed to a controlled demolition — could bring down the towers, arguing that the burning of kerosene-based jet fuel would not have been hot enough to destroy the structures that were built to withstand an airplane crash.