Bob McIlvaine on how his son’s death points to controlled demolition

Clerk Note: Mr. Craig McKee does good work. I was not aware of the explosive damage to the 23rd floor, but do not dispute it. I'd like to know sources.

In the article, Mr. McIlvaine said:

... [T]he tower was divided into three vertical sections. Each elevator (except for the basement-to-penthouse maintenance elevator) serviced only one section. Thus, someone travelling from top to bottom would have had to take three different elevators. This configuration would have prevented fuel from pouring down elevator shafts and causing the destruction.

A minor quibble. If a person / WTC employee wanted to get from the lobby to any floor other than the penhouse visitor center or restaurant or floors below the first transfer floor, they would need to take at least two elevators: (1) an express to a transfer floor and (2) a local elevator servicing 1/3 of the building between transfer floors.

I do not believe that tourists were required to use more than one elevator. Therefore, it could be said that these would be express ground-floor-to-penthouse.

For those morbidly curious to see disinformation at play, follow the link to its source and see what happens in the comments, leading Mr. McKee to close them a day later. Dr. James Fetzer arrives on the scenes. I think he is right about nuclear devices, although could maybe refine his argument further with Dr. Andre Gsponer's fourth generation nuclear devices. Were he to do so, he'd more easily be able to withstand the Travis & sockpuppet2012 attacks about radioative dust. FGND describe the nature of the beast appropriately.

Dr. Fetzer doesn't go into FGND or my premises, even after contacted directly for opinions on article "Beyond Misinformation: FGND". Dr. Fetzer is a showman procuring a little fame and retirement income. If he keeps some batshit crazy in his portfolio, it provides some insurance against being taken out. Therefore he won't correct mistakes in his understanding.


Bob McIlvaine on how his son’s death points to controlled demolition


By: Craig McKee
Date: 2016-09-10

This article is a lightly modified version of a piece I just wrote for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which you can read here. I thank the staff at AE911Truth for making it possible for me to speak with Bob McIlvaine and write this article.—CM

Bob McIlvaine and his family are not alone in having suffered a devastating personal loss on September 11, 2001. The loved ones of the nearly 3,000 victims of the destruction at the World Trade Center know what he has endured for the past 15 years.

But McIlvaine is different from most of these families in important ways. In addition to his unwavering and often lonely fight to expose the complicity of the U.S. government in this false flag attack, he has strong forensic evidence that his 26-year-old son, Bobby, was killed by a powerful explosion as he was about to enter the lobby of the North Tower. That evidence is corroborated by the accounts of many FDNY members, police officers, and workers who reported explosions in the lower parts of the towers before the buildings were destroyed—some of them even before the first airplane struck.

In a recent interview, McIlvaine said his son’s body was one of the first to be recovered and taken to the New York City morgue on that day. He explained that he has been able to reach more definitive conclusions about the details of his son’s death only since conferring with the doctor who had examined his body at the morgue.

The meeting, which McIlvaine recalls happening in 2006 or 2007, provided evidence that a huge explosion — and not the North Tower’s eventual demise — was responsible for killing his son. According to McIlvaine, the wounds described by the doctor indicated that his son had been hit by flying glass from some kind of massive blast. Bobby’s face was damaged beyond recognition, he had lacerations all over his chest from flying glass, and he had post-mortem burns. In fact, the blast was strong enough to literally blow Bobby out of his laced shoes (they were not on the body when it was brought to the morgue).

“My final summation is that he was walking into the building, and before he got into the building there was a huge explosion, and of course the force of it just threw him back into the open area,” McIlvaine says. “That’s why he was picked up so quickly, because the EMTs came down there so quickly. Someone had gotten him out of there and to the morgue before the towers came down.”

It is the nature of Bobby’s injuries that convinces the elder McIlvaine that the explosion had nothing to do with the airplane hitting the tower. That conclusion is at odds with the explanation put forth by the 9/11 Commission, which attributed explosions in the Twin Towers’ lower floors and basements to fireballs of exploding jet fuel coming down the elevator shafts and blowing out.

“He wasn’t hit by a fireball, he was hit by a detonation,” McIlvaine contends. “In a detonation, the blast is first and then followed by the heat.”

He points out that the official account credits the supposed fireball with blowing out floors in different parts of the building — leaving many untouched floors in between the damaged ones.

“It blew out the 72nd floor, it blew out the 23rd floor, it blew out the lobby, it blew out all sorts of floors in the basement, and it even destroyed parts of the PATH [rail] station more than 200 feet away. For one fireball to do all that — well, that’s one powerful fireball.”

This becomes even more impossible, he argues, when you consider that the tower was divided into three vertical sections. Each elevator (except for the basement-to-penthouse maintenance elevator) serviced only one section. Thus, someone travelling from top to bottom would have had to take three different elevators. This configuration would have prevented fuel from pouring down elevator shafts and causing the destruction.

“It’s impossible for a fireball to come down that far and create that kind of damage.”

What made the horror of September 11 even worse for the McIlvaine family initially was that they had no information about their son and didn’t know if he was alive or dead. Adding to their uncertainty was that he didn’t actually work in the towers; instead, he worked for Merrill Lynch in an office building across the street from the World Trade Center. So McIlvaine thinks it’s possible that his son was either on his way to a Merrill Lynch seminar that was being held on the 106th floor of the North Tower or was cutting through to get to his own office.

A Canadian who worked for Merrill Lynch in 2001 and who was at the World Trade Center that day contacted McIlvaine two years ago. The man explained that he was heading to the same conference on the 106th floor about the same time that Bobby would have been approaching the building. But he had stopped for a coffee on the way — a decision that he thinks might have saved his life. While ordering his coffee, he heard a massive explosion in the North Tower lobby.

McIlvaine says he doesn’t tell his son’s story that often anymore because most people just don’t want to hear it. Even the 9/11 families don’t want anything to do with the idea that the event was, as he claims, perpetrated by their own government.

“People look at the United States as a father figure, and they just can’t believe their father could do something that evil.”

The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.


Emmanuel Goldstein said...

The 9/11 official story is:

Nineteen fanatical Arab hijackers, masterminded by an evil genius named Osama bin Laden, crash airplanes into steel skyscrapers because they “hate our freedom to consume”. (And what did Bush tell us to do right after the event? Go shopping!”) Inexplicably the jet fuel, which is basically kerosene that burns at about 400c, took on the qualities of an explosive demolition agent, vaporizing 70 tons of aircraft into a puff of smoke and causing 110-story buildings to collapse into a pile of rubble.

The 9/11 Truth Movement has the dual purpose of vectoring genuine truth seekers to dead ends, where anger, hype, and paranoia endlessly stress the seeker and those around him or her, and to facilitate the mainstream media’s task of branding those who ask questions of authority and the true nature of reality as insane. What if the 9/11 Truth Movement is nothing more than a pseudo-movement promoting a government “alternative official” story?

When the truth about 9/11 is finally exposed, not only will the wars be ended, but the world will finally be liberated from the grip of the oil companies. If you are interested in evidence and not opinion, read WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO? as I did over 5½ years ago.

Emmanuel Goldstein said...

Popular theories about what destroyed the World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001 are:

1 Fires from jet fuel and office materials weakened steel in the upper floors and the buildings collapsed

2 Conventional controlled demolition blew out supports at the base and the buildings collapsed

3 Thermite cut steel columns on virtually every floor and the buildings collapsed

4 Conventional explosives blew the buildings up

5 Mini-nukes blew the buildings up

Theories 1, 2 and 3 rely on gravity to bring the buildings down while the last two blow them up. Popular theories, yes, and dead wrong.

Five facts scientifically documented in Ph.D. engineer Judy Wood’s comprehensive textbook (Where Did The Towers Go?) prove the popular theories false beyond any doubt whatsoever. Yes, I know it’s amazing. Who’d a thunk it’d be this easy? I'm a thinker and not a believer. It is in the interest of the government to have a population of believers and not thinkers. The media assists this goal explicitly and in concert as agents-of-influence.


1. DEBRIS: What debris? There was so little debris from each 110-story building that there was no “pile” or “stack.” Rubble totaled less than a story. It was a football field as a survivor who emerged from Stairwell B, North Tower, exclaimed. No computers, toilets, and only one small piece from one Steel-case file cabinet were found. Some steel and mostly dust remained. Lack of debris on the ground from quarter-mile-high twin towers whispers “no collapse.” See Chapter 9.

2. BATHTUB: A bathtub or slurry wall surrounded 70 feet of WTC subbasements to prevent the Hudson River from flooding the WTC and downtown. If each 500,000-ton tower had slammed into the bathtub in 10 seconds or less, the protective wall would collapse. Did not happen. Upshot? Collapses did not happen. See Chapter 5.

3. SEISMIC IMPACT: “Had the towers collapsed, foundation bedrock would have experienced tremendous force hammering on it throughout the ‘collapse,’” writes Dr. Wood. Seismic instruments registered disturbances far too short in duration and far too small to record tower collapses. This was true of both the twin towers and 47-story WTC7. Again, no evidence of collapses. See Chapter 6.

4. SOUND: There were no loud explosions, as established by videos, witnesses, and the official report of NIST. Nor were there loud screeches and screams from massive metal falling, colliding, scraping and collapsing on metal. See Chapter 6.

5. DUST: Photos, videos and witness testimony show the towers turned to powder in mid-air. Tim McGinn, NYPD, said, “I was standing there for a couple of seconds thinking where the f**k is the tower? I simply couldn’t comprehend it.” The dust roll-out was so enormous and thick it blocked out sunlight and left an inch or more of dust covering downtown. Much of it wafted into the upper atmosphere. The volume was incredible. Particles from dust samples were smaller than red blood cells and about the size of DNA. As for toxicity, researchers said the dust “recorded the highest levels we have ever seen in over 7,000 measurements we have made of very fine air pollution throughout the world, including Kuwait and China.” See Chapters 8, 9, 14-16.

Vatic Clerk said...

Dear Mr. Goldstein,

How about authoring something original? I plop various sentences from you into Google and find they go back to 2012 and even 2009.

Secondly, -- ho hum -- I've read Dr. Wood's "Where did the the towers go?" thoroughly and know exactly where she skews things. First and foremost, she doesn't take her analysis far enough and purposely parks in dead-end alleys. Secondly, she introduces lots of distractions, skew, and innuendo, such as Hutchison, Tesla energy from space, and energy from hurricanes. Third and most important, she doesn't power her DEW devices with anything real-world operational. Promoting or allow it to be promoted about "beams from space" is proof of her deceit. Optics and energy sources confound the ability to enable the destruction observed happening on the ground.

Had she promoted "DEW within the structures" and specifically "fourth generation nuclear devices" which are all within the DEW classification, she would have hit the nail on the head. But she stops short. Purposely. And isn't open to new information or analysis that would keep her on the road and not in the weeds.

Have Dr. Wood look into Dr. Andre Gsponer.

// vc