March 5, 2005: Debunking 9/11 Myths - Ben Chertoff
The Art Bell Archive · Arthur William Bell III
October 31, 20252h 53m
Audio is streamed directly from the publisher (archive.org) as published in their RSS feed. Play Podcasts does not host this file. Rights-holders can request removal through the copyright & takedown page.
Show Notes
Art Bell speaks with Ben Chertoff, a researcher for Popular Mechanics magazine, about the publication's investigation into the most persistent conspiracy theories surrounding the September 11 attacks. Chertoff describes the methodology behind the article, which assembled a team of engineers, scientists, and aviation experts to examine sixteen widely circulated claims. He addresses the theory that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by controlled demolition, explaining that structural engineers attribute the progressive collapse to fire-weakened steel trusses and the enormous kinetic energy of falling floors.
Art challenges Chertoff on several fronts, pressing him about the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, which was not struck by an aircraft yet fell hours later in what many observers describe as a classic demolition pattern. Chertoff responds that extensive fires and structural damage from falling debris explain the collapse, though he acknowledges more investigation is warranted. The conversation also covers the Pentagon strike, with Chertoff addressing claims that the initial hole appeared too small for a commercial airliner.
Callers confront Chertoff with rapid-fire questions about molten metal in the rubble, the speed of the collapses, and claims of forewarning. Art maintains a skeptical stance throughout, noting that Popular Mechanics has a vested interest in mainstream explanations while acknowledging the article's thoroughness on certain technical points.
Art challenges Chertoff on several fronts, pressing him about the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, which was not struck by an aircraft yet fell hours later in what many observers describe as a classic demolition pattern. Chertoff responds that extensive fires and structural damage from falling debris explain the collapse, though he acknowledges more investigation is warranted. The conversation also covers the Pentagon strike, with Chertoff addressing claims that the initial hole appeared too small for a commercial airliner.
Callers confront Chertoff with rapid-fire questions about molten metal in the rubble, the speed of the collapses, and claims of forewarning. Art maintains a skeptical stance throughout, noting that Popular Mechanics has a vested interest in mainstream explanations while acknowledging the article's thoroughness on certain technical points.