Me, Art Bell, and 9-11
The Ben/Michael Chertoff-WH coverup of 9/11
Me, Art Bell, and 9-11
by Lisa Guliani
On Saturday, March 5th, 2005 I called Art Bell's Coast to Coast AM late-night radio talk-radio program - at least 50 times. I got through to Art once, at approximately 1:45 am. God must have intervened because it's very difficult to get Art on the phone nowadays, especially when the theme of his show is going to be debunking 9-11 conspiracies. In addition to calling Art on the telephone, I also fast-blasted him numerous times and sent him several regular emails with questions for Ben Chertoff, research editor of Popular Mechanics. I had quite a few talking points I wanted Art's guest to address - like this one:
Explain the pools of molten steel burning 70 feet below street level for 100 days after 9-11. Since we know the jet fuel burnt off within a couple of minutes and jet fuel fires cannot even come close to the temperatures it takes to create a molten or liquid state in steel, then how do you explain this? This is addressed at length in 9-11 on Trial by Victor Thorn. FEMA's report even stated that the WTC fires burned at, or below temperatures in a typical office fire. So, if we know that hydrocarbon fires can only reach a maximum temperature of 1517 degrees Fahrenheit, how could they possibly have melted this steel, when the melting point of steel is 2,795 degrees and the boiling point of steel (when it becomes a molten liquid) is 5,182 degrees Fahrenheit.
The existence of these burning pools of molten steel were confirmed by:
- Mark Lorieux of Controlled Demolition, Inc
- Peter Tully, President of Tully Construction
- and the American Free Press newspaper
Please explain where these molten pools of steel came from, because hydrocarbon fires are not going to burn in an oxygen-starved environment as these underground fires did.
Art actually answered the phone when I called in during that first hour. I was calling too early, he said. His guest had not yet been introduced. I still laid out the above issue, and also mentioned that the official version of the WTC collapses defy both Galileo's Law of Falling Bodies, and also Isaac Newton's First Law of Motion. He suggested I fast blast him with the information to help him remember it. So I did. In fact, I emailed him many times, with different talking points and pertinent scientific questions about 9-11. I made a concerted effort to be concise, succinct, to stay on-point, and use no "conspiracy theory". I kept my finger on the speed-dial for four hours, alternating between the three phone numbers he provides for listeners to call in to his show. A few times, I heard the phone ringing, but Art never picked up. Instead, after MANY rings, a recorded voice terminated the call. The rest of my call-in attempts for the duration of the show were unsuccessful.
I made a point of depriving myself of sleep not merely to listen to Art Bell's program tonight, but to actively participate and engage in some serious, scientific dialogue with both he and Ben Chertoff. I waited and waited for him to broach the subject matter I had laid on the table in the first hour. Bell conveniently failed to do so, even though my numerous emails and fast-blasts must have constituted a nice chunk of his inbox. He never touched the points I made to him earlier in the show - but instead allowed his listeners to be subjected to some of the most ludicrous, imbecilic, incomplete disinformation I've heard since the "hologram theory" first made its debut. Chertoff and Bell had a helluva time disparaging and marginalizing 9/11 "conspiracy researchers," and he made no bones about telling everyone how "angry" he was to be labeled a traitor by a number of people in his audience. Art himself gives legs to conspiracies such as crop circles, extra terrestrials and shadow people, and appears to embrace such "entertaining" conspiracies with a level of attention and seriousness that is apparently more 'worthy" of serious thought than those of us who pose intelligent questions about the government's official version of what happened on 9-11. In fact, Bell has allowed many of his past callers to ramble on incessantly about ghostly experiences or stories about seeing dead people - but tonight, he cut me off about 9-11 after just a very few minutes and never followed up on my questions with his guest. Despite the impression he gave (that he would address my points with Ben Chertoff), Art never bothered to utter a word once his guest was in the hotbox.
The more Chertoff spoke, the more I realized that the team of Popular Mechanics "experts" had absolutely failed to research the most salient issues regarding not only the WTC tower collapses, but also the anomalies surrounding the Pentagon strike and what happened to Flight 93. I found myself asking aloud how Chertoff could possibly have consulted with so many so-called "experts," and then subsequently present such lopsided unconvincing explanations to the public. When the matter of WTC steel was raised, Chertoff said that the steel was "weakened" by the heat of the fires in the towers, which we were told burned at approximately 1800 degrees F. Absolute rubbish! The maximum temperature that hydrocarbon fires will burn is 1517 degrees, but the WTC fires never burned hot enough nor long enough in order to attain this temp on 9/11. Chertoff was talking about the plasticity of steel. So my fast blast to Art said the following:
"At 1022 degrees, steel reaches a point of elasticity, and at 1320 degrees it attains plasticity. Elasticity means that when the steel is bent, it returns to its original shape and will spring back. Plasticity means that the steel is permanently deformed and does not return to its original shape. The steel would have had to be heated to 1320 degrees to be weakened to 20% of its original strength. Since the fires did not reach any of the critical temperatures needed to melt the steel - and didn't even come close to these temps, how could the buildings collapse due to plasticity? The towers were rated to bear five times their rated strength. Even if the steel was reduced to 60% of its rated strength, it would still be able to support three-times its rated strength and would not have been weakened sufficiently to cause the collapses. The core columns were robust structures of steel and concrete. If the towers collapsed due to plane impacts and subsequent fires, then the 47 steel/concrete core columns should have been left standing. Remember, the damage to the towers was NOT uniform and the fires did not burn uniformly."
I would have LOVED to get Ben Chertoff to answer the many questions I had waiting for him, but regrettably, every single email and fast blast was in vain. Art and Ben were apparently having more fun diminishing the work of independent 9-11 researchers and mischaracterizing the whole lot as "off their nut". Rather than selecting the most intelligent talking points and laying them on the table, Bell chose instead to accept his guest's explanations as accurately "etched-in-stone," when in fact, they are not. A number of callers did manage to get through, and almost none of them were buying Chertoff's asinine assertions. He was pressed about the annoying little fact that several of the 9/11 hijackers have been found to be alive when they're allegedly dead (at least according to the government). In response, he replied that this is an unsubstantiated rumor which started with a BBC report, yet failed to mention the meticulous research of David Ray Griffin, which presents credible evidence that many of the so-called "dead" suicide hijackers are indeed, still alive in other countries. Chertoff tells the audience that his team didn't really get into investigating that part of the story. Why not?
Another caller broached the subject of government foreknowledge of 9-11 and how certain officials were warned not to fly. We must add this to the "gray area" because Popular Mechanics failed to look into this as well, and Chertoff could not even remotely answer the question. Callers continued to back him into a corner as the night wore on, despite Bell's official 9-11 government ass-kissing and his ongoing snide commentary, repeatedly referring to conspiracy theorists as "wing-nuts".
The topic of the Pentagon strike was also presented, and here we all got to witness some really blatant lying on the part of Chertoff. My fingers were burning into my keyboard and phone pad as I listened to him spout off that Flight 77 actually hit the Pentagon, and the subsequent shinola about damage to the Pentagon lawn. Excuse me, Mr. Chertoff - what damage might this be? Are we looking at the same photos? Where exactly are the scorch-and-burn marks you're talking about? Whose lawn is he looking at? Chertoff's Pentagon non-explanations were so outlandish, it's no wonder people have an easier time believing in shadow people. The Popular Mechanics editor casually cited evidence of plane wreckage and bodies of victims at the crash scene. Hello? Bodies? What bodies? Are we examining the same crime scene? Mr. Chertoff, could you please point out to me even ONE dead body found at the Pentagon on 9/11? Who's "off their nut" here?
Still another caller pointed to the five frames of video footage which have been the subject of intense scrutiny over the last few years - you know, the doctored frames with the incorrect date stamp that do not show any jetliner? Again, we were told by Chertoff that this is terrain that the "experts" of Popular Mechanics have yet to traverse. What are they waiting for - a formal invitation? Furthermore, he sidestepped around the FBI's utter failure to release the videotapes seized from surrounding entities like the Citgo gas station, Sheraton Hotel, Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles, and the Pentagon's own videos. According to the sputtering Chertoff, this is understandable because the Pentagon strike is still under official investigation. No kidding - an "official" investigation, huh? Wow, who could tell? I really wanted to ask him what his 'team" had discovered regarding the Pentagon jetliner in light of the fact that the FBI first said the entire plane had vaporized, and then did a complete 180 and later said that they have reconstructed nearly all of the aircraft and are storing it in an FBI hangar. Has Chertoff, or any of his crack investigative team, examined this alleged evidence? The only time I ever hear this subject brought up is among independent investigators and researchers. Not surprisingly, it wasn't discussed on Art Bell's show.
Chertoff must be privy to some inside scoops the rest of us aren't worthy to know, although he seemed rather clueless about his own family tree. Perhaps the most laughable claim made by Chertoff during this broadcast was his unconvincing dismissal when questioned about his familial tie to Michael Chertoff, the new homeland security czar. You see, it's now known that Ben is Michael Chertoff's cousin (surprise, surprise!) according to Christopher Bollyn of the American Free Press newspaper. Bollyn's letter was sarcastically read aloud by Bell during the broadcast, during which time Bell also took a jab at Jeff Rense, labeling Rense's website as "anti-Semitic." I guess Art had the time to fire off pot shots at independent researchers like Victor Thorn, but didn't have time to address important inconsistencies in the official government version of 9/11. What a sad, unnecessary waste of valuable time, Art. Chertoff's response to this newly "discovered" family link? He didn't even know (until now) that Michael Chertoff just happens to be his cousin. Sure, Ben. We believe that one.
Apparently, his "team" also didn't bother to investigate the mysterious stock put-options that took place just prior to September 11, 2001, or the fact that the government scenario regarding the WTC collapses defies the laws of nature, even though we "conspiracy theorists" have been focusing on this material for more than three years now and drawing increasing public attention to these matters. Why would Popular Mechanics fail to examine the most credible arguments and glaring inconsistencies with the official story and choose, instead, to shine a spotlight on selective and often less relevant, weaker conspiracies surrounding 9/11? After all, the experts at Popular Mechanics have Victor Thorn's book, 9-11 On Trial. Again, do they need a formal written invitation? Well, we sent them one via the U.S. Postal Service. Will they decide to do a follow-up addressing the conclusions in this work, or will they refuse to "go there?"
This show proved one thing to me last night, and hopefully it proved something to many of you listeners out there: Art Bell is not about TRUTH. He's about chasing tails, spinning yarns, and creative storytelling. His abject willingness (not to mention ability) to ignore facts that are right in his FACE never ceases to amaze me. How disillusioning it must be for all his groupies, because all Bell is doing with respect to 9-11 is simply taking everybody for yet another ride. This is evidenced by his propensity to peddle sloppy half-baked research, poorly investigated claims, and absolute garbage as truth rather than deal with the topic honestly. I'm also not buying into his phony self-righteous indignation, either. It's no wonder the public has barraged him with scathing criticisms and angry accusations over his failure to confront the status quo and rise above it. For all intents and purposes, Bell has effectively shown his hand as a government shill once and for all, which hardly surprises me. Last night, he had the chance to show millions of listeners around the world what he's made of - and he most certainly did, without question. His repetitive mantra of "I don't believe for ONE SECOND that the government had anything to do with this," simply amplifies the obvious: Bell refuses to play hardball with the government while he continues lobbing softballs at his audience. Art seems to have an aversion to taking a serious look at all the real scientific facts and serious inconsistencies with many aspects of 9/11, for whatever reason. I hope the payoff is well worth the choice he's made.
Likewise, Ben Chertoff (Art's guest) is either largely uninformed, incompetent to take on the task of speaking to these issues, or he too is akin to the paid pundits we see on our nightly television news networks. This would hardly be a revelation to me, considering that the Hearst Corporation doesn't exactly have a reputation for dealing in honest journalism. Moreover, the Hearst Corporation is better known for its outright lies of the past more than anything else. I'm kind of surprised that one of these gentlemen didn't bother to throw in an alien sighting for good measure, just for kicks. That certainly would have had more plausibility than the propaganda-tripe Chertoff regurgitated (at Bell's invitation) to a rather huge late-night global audience.
Finally, I was inundated with emails from people I know who also listened in during this show, and they forwarded to me copies of fast blasts they sent to Art during the program, which he obviously never bothered to take the time to address. Shame on you, Art. You ARE a coward. Maybe Amy Goodman and Mike Gallagher will move over and give you a seat in the SHILL VIP box. I have just one more question for the King of "Coast to Coast": When do we get our turn, Art?
contribute to this article
contribute to this article
add comment to discussion
view discussion from this article