Interview with Dr. Niels Harrit on Discovery of Nano-Thermite in WTC Dust

Jack Etkin [00:00:20]:
Hello and welcome to Face 2 Face. Today we are going to be talking about one of the most important issues in the world, eleventh, and what really happened on that fateful day because the tentacles of eleventh are reaching out to us even today here in 2,011. This is being filmed at the very end of February. Our prime minister has, just gone down to the United States, and they are talking about putting a single border around both of our countries. There’s no coverage in the media about this, and the main push for that single border around Canada and the United States and getting rid of the border between us, they tell us comes from eleventh because of the terror threat we face. Wars have been caused because of 911. It is still one of the most important issues in the world, and we do need an independent investigation to find out what happened on that day. Our guest today is doctor Nils Herritt.

Jack Etkin [00:01:23]:
Doctor Herritt is a professor emeritus from the University of Copenhagen in Denmark. And, Nils, maybe you can tell us how you or tell us something about yourself and how you got involved in all of this.

Niels Harrit [00:01:37]:
Okay. Well, as you mentioned, I’m a chemistry professor from Copenhagen, Denmark, which is in Europe on the top of Germany. And I have been teaching organic chemistry there for more than 40 theory, 42 years to be exact. And I’m 66 years old. And, regarding 911, I got involved with the issue accidentally 4 years ago. My wife has been a peace activist all her life and has a very high she’s renowned for this in the Danish community. So probably this is the reason why she had sent to her 3 DVDs anonymously 4 years ago. And on the cover of these DVDs, there was a big ice berg and it was called Under the Surface.

Niels Harrit [00:02:34]:
And we thought for a while that this was regarding global warming and we were very busy, so they were lying around maybe for a month or 2. I don’t remember. At some time, we put on one of the DVDs and the DVD player, and it turned out to be a presentation by an American professor called Stephen E. Jones from the Brigham Young University in Utah. And in this in this presentation, among many other things, he showed a building collapsing, which turned out to be building 7 of the World Trade Center complicity. And if some of your viewers here have not heard about this before, it was a 186 meters steel framed high riser, 47 stories, which came down 7 hours after the North Tower, a World Trade Center collapsed. And there were 2 2 obvious. It was a shock for me to see for theory reasons.

Niels Harrit [00:03:45]:
One is that I haven’t heard about this before.

Jack Etkin [00:03:48]:
So even until 4 years ago, you had never heard that

Niels Harrit [00:03:51]:
No. I like most other people, I had accepted the official conspiracy theory about Osama bin Laden and the 19 hijackers. I believe that they actually had flown into World Trade Center and that the Twin Towers had collapsed due to the impact of the airliners. And so sitting there watching a third high riser collapsing was a shock. For this simple reason, why haven’t why haven’t I heard this before? Why isn’t this a gigantic issue in the press that there were 2 airliners, but there were 3 skyscrapers? I mean, everybody who can can do math and count to 3 should recognize that there is something here which maybe should be looked closer into. This was one thing. The other thing was the way this building collapsed because it’s almost 200 meters high and it comes straight down into its own footprint. It’s going down just like this.

Niels Harrit [00:04:57]:
And being trained as a scientist, you are you have developed an intuition for for you’re trying to understand whatever goes on around you in the physical environment. And if you have a good education, most of the time, you understand what is going on, why you have get electricity out of the wall, how you get how the car is running, and, all kind of different phenomena. But this, I just could not comprehend. Why should this building, apparently for no recognizable reason at all, suddenly just collapsed just like that. And when, there’s something you do not understand, you have a problem. So this is for once I had a problem. And it took me it took me a couple of weeks actually to digest this experience and to understand that this was important. And from that day on, there’s been no way back for me as an individual, as a person.

Niels Harrit [00:06:06]:
And because I would say many many people maybe consider that that they found 911 at some time in their life and in time and space. I would rather say it is 911 which finds us. And 911 found me in the chemistry department of University of Copenhagen, and I realized that this meant that I there was something I had to do because I can read the reports, the official technical reports. And as I understand, I I did not understand the physics of what actually was happening. So I looked into this, and ever since, the more you look into it, the worse it gets.

Jack Etkin [00:07:01]:
And you’re talking about the entire eleventh issue. The more you look at it, the worse it gets. Yeah.

Niels Harrit [00:07:07]:
But may but may we can maybe we should come back to the entire issue a little later on and just point our intention to this building 7 because what or maybe I can give the result is there’s no doubt that this building was taken down in a controlled demolition. I consider this to be mainstream scientific conclusion. There’s no way around this conclusion. There are so many observations which is only compatible with the controlled demolition. The most important is the official explanation is this building and the towers came down due to office fires. But it has never happened before in history that a steel frame high rises should collapse due to fire. And and this is this is a very basic thing in science. Science is based on observation and experience.

Niels Harrit [00:08:04]:
And since there have been maybe 4 or 600 number reported fires in steel frame high rises and at no occasion it has collapsed due to fire means that the experiment has been done. The experiments has been done and the conclusion has been drawn. A steel framed high rise simply does not collapse due to fire. So for the official investigators to claim this was what happened this day is violation of scientific principles just for this simple line of reasoning alone. But next, the way this building is collapsing, it is it is it’s falling what we call free fall. The trajectory of the 47 theory when it goes down is like an object falling with no support. It’s it’s going into free fall speed, which means that all supporting elements within the steel frame structure, that point was eleventh. As in to see the whole building going down completely symmetrically means that all the elements which are 24 core columns and and 57 perimeter columns, all of these columns had to be cut at the same time for this phenomenon to happen.

Niels Harrit [00:09:27]:
And this is this is basic theory simple elementary physics, and the conclusion is obvious that this building was taken down in a control demolition.

Jack Etkin [00:09:38]:
We’re talking about building number 7, which came down, I think around 5 or 5:30.

Niels Harrit [00:09:43]:
520.

Jack Etkin [00:09:45]:
In the afternoon of September 11, 2001, it was the 3rd building that collapsed on the day of eleventh. Nils Herritt, doctor Nils Herritt of Copenhagen University is saying that that is simply not possible. The way the building collapsed and the excuse given for its collapse, which is, office fires, simply is not possible. Now ask yourself, what does this mean if that third building’s collapse, which has never even, it barely ever made public. You said you yourself didn’t find out about that until 2007. Why are they keeping it a secret? Who is keeping it a secret? Why can’t we know the truth about what happened on that day?

Niels Harrit [00:10:32]:
Yeah. Well, it it it has not been shown in the mainstream media after after the day itself. And finally, this is a little footnote. It was announced the collapse was announced by BBC 20 minutes prior to its collapse.

Jack Etkin [00:10:47]:
Yeah. Imagine what that means.

Niels Harrit [00:10:49]:
Yeah. That’s an but, from then on, my wife and I, we started to first, I after a couple of months just realizing that this was important, I wrote a little essay, submitted it to a newspaper. It was rejected. It was pushed around in the building. I submitted it for another Danish newspaper. And surprisingly, they wrote me back and say, hey. Will you please extend it to the double size and we’ll take it, which they did. And it came we are in March 2,007.

Niels Harrit [00:11:28]:
And so it was and this is a fairly not big, but very influential Danish newspaper. And it was only about building 7. Now look here is a building which came down in in a in a manner which is only compatible with controlled demolition, and that’s it. Absolutely nothing happened. I thought if I just if I just stand up on the soapbox and and tell the truth, it would run by itself. But absolutely nothing happened.

Jack Etkin [00:11:59]:
No official response? No media follow-up?

Niels Harrit [00:12:01]:
No. Absolutely nothing. It was the the the the quiet was deafening. But, so then I decided to put together a talk and presentation and take it from the bottom up, which actually meaning addressing each individual on a one to one basis and and starting giving talks. And I have done this for a long time in giving this presentation almost 100 times in many countries or outside Denmark as well. But what happened then is another person in Denmark, actually an Australian, he translated this little essay into English and put it on his web page. And from that reason, it was recognized. I didn’t I I didn’t consider this as a okay.

Niels Harrit [00:12:50]:
Please do that. I didn’t think much about it. But when it was translated into English, it was also recognized by by a website called Patriots for eleventh truth. And I was asked to if I would allow to be taken in in the category scientists, scholars, I theory, is the category on on on patriots for 9 of them truth, which meant that eventually that I was asked to review a paper by Kevin Ryan who’s a who’s a chemist also in the eleventh truth movement. A very interesting paper about the fires following the collapse of the World Trade Center. And then I I got in contact with Kevin Ryan and eventually was asked to join a team of scientists who was investigating the dust after the collapses of these theory high rises. And in the dust, we have found remains of thermite, which we call nanothermite. It’s a modern material.

Niels Harrit [00:14:02]:
I’m giving a little overview. I’m I know that we have to be explain this more in in a little while. And this has attracted definitely some some attention because the findings of this material in the dust is well, professor Jones, which who I just mentioned, called this the last nail in the coffin. Other people call it this this the loaded gun of 911 because this material can be used as an explosive or an incendiary for cutting steel structures, which was happening on September 11th. The steel structures of these theory high rises were were cut prior to their collapse.

Jack Etkin [00:14:52]:
So you found, after you got involved with the 9 eleventh truth movement Yeah. You did a study or were involved in a study that found traces of nanothermite Yeah. In the dust Yes. Of the collapsed buildings.

Niels Harrit [00:15:07]:
So maybe I should explain first what thermite is. It’s an incendiary. An incendiary is a reactive material or mixture which works by means of heat. You can use it for sitting on fires and arson if and it’s used for that also. But the old time thermite is is was a discovery by a German chemist called Hans Goldschmidt in 18 93, where he discovered that if you take very finely divided aluminum and mix it with very finely divided rust. Two powders. You mix these 2 powders like gunpowder and you can if you can make them react, the reaction is very violent in terms of heat. Enormous amount of heat is developed, and elemental iron is a product from this reaction.

Niels Harrit [00:16:01]:
And it comes out with a temperature of 2,500 degrees centigrade, which is very, very hot. It is a useful process since it can be used for welding. You you get molten iron out of the process, which can be used for welding, say, train rails or tram rails and was patented in 18/98 and used for the first time 18 99, more than 100 years ago. There’s an old invention and very useful, but it can also be used to destroy other steel eleventh, in particular armor, because the iron coming out is more than 1,000 degrees hotter than the melting point of iron and steel. So you can use it in in charges, in military grenades and torpedoes. And it’s been used as such for 80 years at least, many years. So and and this is thermite is an theory. And now what we have found is nanothermite, which is not the same thing as Hans Goldschmidt invented.

Niels Harrit [00:17:15]:
It is in this case, the material has been manufactured using nanotechnological methods. In nanotechnology, you build the material from the atom from an atomic scale and upwards. We call it the bottom up approach in contrast to the top down approach. When, if you want to make finely divided aluminum, you take a chunk of aluminum and you cut it up and you grind it eventually. This is a top down approach. But in nanotechnology, you build the materials from the atomic scale and upwards, So it is not old wine or new bottled. There are 2, consequences of this approach which distinct it from the the good old thermite approach. 1st, the ingredients, which in this case is aluminum and iron oxide particles, are much more intimately mixed in the material.

Niels Harrit [00:18:16]:
So they react with each other much faster and therefore, more hot, more violently than they do in the old time ordinary thermite. And next, due to the way of preparing it, you have the option of putting in other chemicals. Because I I stress that the old time thermite is an incendiary. It works and destructs things by means of heat. But an explosive like dynamite and all kind of stuff, explosives works by means of pressure. Explosives knock things over. There’s a chemical reaction where pressure is developed and and so you knock things over. Now you when you’re making nanothermite, you have the option to put in other stuff in the mix, which use the energy of the chemical reaction and transforms it into a pressure wave.

Niels Harrit [00:19:20]:
So the nanothermic thermite can be can be used as an explosive or as an incendiary. It can go either way. You have this option. And it also maybe has rocket fuel properties in this case based on observations.

Jack Etkin [00:19:41]:
I think that what you have found then, you and others in the dust of the World Trade Center buildings is traces of nanothermite. Yeah. Now you you saw a DVD of the collapse of building number 7 and you think that it’s impossible for this building to have fallen because no other building Yeah. Has ever fallen because of office fires, and yet that’s the official explanation Yeah. For what happened to building number 7. The third building that fell on the day of 911, a building which many people have still never heard of. You did the study, and you found traces of nanothermite. Now how would nanothermite be used to bring down this building?

Niels Harrit [00:20:27]:
This, we do not know exactly. We do not know which role the nanothermic we found played in the demolition of the 3 towers because the the 2 the twin towers were definitely brought down also by controlled demolition, not not an ordinary controlled demolition. Just from seeing the videos of the 2 towers in building 7, you’ll observe that they’re distinctively different because the towers were brought down from the top down starting at the impact of the airliners, while building 7 was taken down from the bottom. This is more classical conventional approach if you want to have a controlled demolition where you eliminate the whole internal structure and then the building comes down in free fall.

Jack Etkin [00:21:14]:
So the entire internal structure of building 7 was eliminated in an instant and the building then just collapsed down?

Niels Harrit [00:21:22]:
Not exactly, but but the last remains of the internal structure was was eliminated. These buildings are are over dimension. There’s there’s a headroom. So you can fall in terms of stability. So you eliminate what is not needed to to keep the building up. So what remains at the preceding the the collapse itself, so what remains after this weakening of and then this is why you use thermite as an incendiary. You can use thermite for cutting the steel beams, and it’s soundless. So in my as I see, what’s going on is that thermite has been used to cut the steel structure almost.

Niels Harrit [00:22:07]:
So it’s just remained standing. And then the very last step of the demolition, the explosive charges come in because they have to be timed very accurately in a very precise time sequence within nanoseconds in order to produce what we are seeing, namely a completely symmetrical collapse into its own footprint.

Jack Etkin [00:22:29]:
Now we have somebody who I think is a very serious person, doctor Niels Harritt, a long time chemistry professor from University of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, I’m sorry, saying that he believes that all 3 buildings on eleventh were brought down as controlled demolitions. Yeah. Now ladies and gentlemen, imagine the importance of this statement and lots of people believe the same thing. There are over 1,000 architects and engineers.

Niels Harrit [00:23:06]:
1400, I think, at the moment. 1400.

Jack Etkin [00:23:09]:
In the group architects and engineers for eleventh Truth who say the same thing. There are thousands and thousands of other serious people making exactly the same allegation that everything we’ve been told about 911 may not be true. That they believe that all theory buildings were brought down as controlled demolitions. Now ask yourself, what does this mean when our politicians and our media will never even give this a mention. Nils, you mentioned you mentioned when we were talking earlier about how much is at stake because of this eleventh issue. Maybe you can just go into that a little bit.

Niels Harrit [00:23:55]:
I think that the what happened on the September 11, 2001 is the most important event to our generation and for our children. I think it’s more important that the bringing down of the Berlin Wall, and I think it was 89. I think it’s, and the consequences of this event is should be obvious to everyone, but it is not it is happening at such a slow pace that people maybe do not connect the dots.

Jack Etkin [00:24:32]:
Please connect them.

Niels Harrit [00:24:35]:
No. I would rather say I would rather say that if you if you have a problem being with the environment or being with the economy, which is very serious, maybe not so much in Canada, but in the rest of the world, I think they are deep in the red. Global warming, if you care, Did I say environment? Whatever war is going on and civil I think I think the whole civilization actually is in the balance these days. And this is everything we eleventh this is very serious. If you the planet planet Earth will still be theory. No matter what we do. There’ll always be spiders and rats. But what we call civilization, if you care about music, this is what we’re talking about.

Niels Harrit [00:25:31]:
If you care about the health of your grandparents, this is what we’re talking about. If you care about theater literature, if you care about people, kids playing in the playground, If you whatever you care for, whatever you love, this is what is at stake here, our civilization. And it’s very fragile, and it can easily be lost. And I see 911 as the pivotal eleventh, which has triggered a whole series of evolutions. Several rights is one obvious thing. In the airport, you know, I had a body scan when coming here to Canada in Amsterdam.

Jack Etkin [00:26:16]:
Given to you by the Canadian?

Niels Harrit [00:26:18]:
No. By by by the by the Dutch, by KLM, the Dutch airliner, and my wife. We were scared, and this means that somebody actually can see your credentials. You stand there naked on their screen. If you go to Heathrow Airport in London, you’ll see old women having to take off their shoes. And you we all know that you’re not allowed to take to take more than 100 milliliters of a liquid on board an airplane. It is all due to eleventh, and we have not see seen even a single piece of forensic evidence for the the attack on United States was carried out by Muslims. What I call the official conspiracy theory.

Niels Harrit [00:27:12]:
Maybe we should rest a little. A conspiracy Conspiracy. Conspiracy. I’m sorry. Conspiracy means that more than 2 people are talking together in order to do something illegal. Okay? So everybody must admit that Osama bin Laden and the 19 hijackers were in a conspiracy, to according to the official version of events, were in a conspiracy to carry out the attack. So it must be considered a conspiracy theory, the official inclination. Now there’s been no forensic evidence for that this is true.

Niels Harrit [00:27:46]:
We haven’t seen any piece of evidence for it, which is remarkable since Denmark when it got into the Afghan war.

Jack Etkin [00:27:54]:
And so did Canada. We are at war in Afghanistan because of 9 eleventh No evidence ever been presented according to doctor Neil Sanders. And

Niels Harrit [00:28:02]:
this happened actually. We both both our countries got into this war on on, on on Wednesday, September 12th, less than 24 hours after the attack. This is a story on its own, but we share some experience with the Afghan war. Maybe you’re not aware that Denmark is relatively small country, but we are in the Helmand province of Afghanistan. And due to that, Denmark actually has the highest number of casualties relative to the number of citizens in Denmark among the NATO countries. Now which country has the highest number of casualties relative to the number of troops in Afghanistan? Canada. So we share some some experience in the Afghan war, and we set out to catch a criminal, we were told, by the name of Osama bin Laden. And we haven’t but we haven’t seen the evidence for this person actually being guilty in the crime.

Niels Harrit [00:29:11]:
And he is not wanted by the FBI for the attack on on on 911.

Jack Etkin [00:29:19]:
And that’s worth repeating too. He mister Osama bin Laden is this is official is not wanted by the FBI for the attack because there’s no evidence. Yeah. Imagine what this means.

Niels Harrit [00:29:31]:
If if FBI admitted this quite openly, a journalist called it has, I theory, as I recall, called FBI and said why is it not wanted for 911? And the FBI, the spokes man, his name was Rex Tom, he responded because FBI does not have any hard evidence connecting Osama bin Laden with eleventh. So he’s not wanted for that. I think this is a so this is one of one of the many reasons why 911 is important, and I considered it also as pivotal is the key. 911 is the key. If you want peace and democracy in the world, 911 is the key to the whole thing.

Jack Etkin [00:30:19]:
In other words, an understanding, an honest understanding of what really happened on that day is key because then we’ll see that we are being completely misled by by whom? I mean, obviously, the the people who run the country because it’s the politicians and certainly the media who are owned by the corporations in Canada, are giving us only the official. I don’t know where even that story came from. Is it the George Bush story? Is it the corporate story that, you know, mister Osama bin Laden and and, 19 hijackers did all of this on eleventh, and yet, doctor Herritt got involved in this because in 2007, years after eleventh, he saw, a DVD showing the collapse of the third building that fell on that day and was amazed that he did not know that a third building had fallen, as many people in Victoria and certainly many people in Canada don’t know that a third building had fallen. He didn’t believe what he was seeing was possible because no steel building has ever collapsed because of office fires, which was the official story for building 7, investigated, and found in the, in the dust of the 3 buildings traces of nanothermite, a very modern, incendiary and explosive that could have been used to bring down the 3 buildings.

Niels Harrit [00:31:50]:
At least it shouldn’t have been there.

Jack Etkin [00:31:51]:
And it shouldn’t have been there. Yeah. Now let’s let’s let’s ask some questions about exactly the have you has there been a scientific study? Is that what you’re involved in or is it research? What exactly maybe have you found and how was it found?

Niels Harrit [00:32:08]:
Well, it was found as as I told you, I Stephen E. Jones should have the credit actually for getting the idea of looking for remaining explosives. Whenever you have an explosion, there’s always something left. It’s never complicity after so after an explosion, the police can always go in and see what kind of explosives was used in an event. And due to some early reports, investigations of the dust from a private company called theory Lee Group and from the United States Geological Survey, independent observations implying that the thermite had been used. So so John should be given the credit for for taking the initiative to look into the dust with a microscope because what we are talking about here are tiny, tiny particles. You can only see them under a microscope.

Jack Etkin [00:33:06]:
Can you just tell us who doctor Jones is?

Niels Harrit [00:33:08]:
Stephen e Jones was a physics professor of Brigham Young University in Utah, and he has he was put on early retirement due to his activities and doing this research, and he has now actually moved from the city and has finally retired. But he did he started these investigations and took the initiative to it, and I was brought into the team, invited and accepted. And so together, there’s there are 9 authors in total on the final publication. Each individual has contributed some to the final thing. And so what we what we have found is this material, these tiny, tiny chips where the aluminum, as I explained, and the iron oxide, the rust is mixed very intimately.

Jack Etkin [00:34:06]:
And this creates the nanothermite with

Niels Harrit [00:34:09]:
Yeah. They react with with each other when it finally takes off.

Jack Etkin [00:34:13]:
How was the nanothermite placed, on we have steel beams. How is the nanothermite placed on the, on the steel in order to cut it?

Niels Harrit [00:34:25]:
This is this is a question I’m I’m I’m very frequently asked because to take down these buildings, you need huge amount of explosives and incendiaries, whatever it should be. How did how did they get into the buildings? And my first answer is on pallets. I mean, if you have to bring in explosives in these amounts, I would put it on pallets and then get a truck and then drive it up and then move it in. And you only have to have have a good appointment with the man at the door in order to get in. And, of course, you should not ride on the side of the of the package that these are explosion for explosives for demolition of the WTC. You do not do that. But, of course, I understand your your your question is more subtle. How do you actually get access to the steel frame structure? Now Kevin Ryan, who is I mentioned once already, has written a series of 4 papers called access to the towers.

Niels Harrit [00:35:21]:
Because we don’t there’s no of course, we do not know the exact answer to your question, how they were brought in. But you can point to the fact, for instance, like, which companies were tenants on the floors where the jetliners came in, which companies had the contracts doing renovation. There was a renovation program of the fireproofing of the whole structure, which had went on actually for some time. Which companies had, the conspiracy with the renovation of the elevator shafts, one of the biggest, renovation programs for elevators in the in the towers, which companies had the contracts on the on the cleaning up, which companies had the contracts for security in the buildings. And Kevin Ryan is putting all these individual dots together, and the web coming out of it is maybe coincidental, but, it is quite a coincidence. Let me put it this way. So anyone anyone being interested in actually how who had access to the towers, I would recommend Kevin Ryan’s structures.

Jack Etkin [00:36:46]:
And can how do people Google that? Just Kevin Ryan?

Niels Harrit [00:36:50]:
Kevin Ryan. Yeah. K e v e n and Ryan is r y. Iris, r y a n. Yeah. And access to the TALIS. Or just Kevin Ryan an access, and they will get right to it.

Jack Etkin [00:37:04]:
Yeah. And once again, we have to ask why we, the people of Canada, are not given any of this information. I mean, isn’t this interesting and exciting news? Shouldn’t CBC, CTV, The Globe and Mail, our own local news media, CFAX, The Times columnist, shouldn’t they be all over this? I mean here is a story of monumental proportion, of monumental issue. Nothing. Why is this quiet? Where do the decisions come from to keep this quiet? We have got to be asking these questions because as Neil said, so much focuses on eleventh. If we’re being lied to about this and misinformed, then we have to question everything that’s going on around us. I’ve been given a few questions to ask here, and one is about the deniers, those who say that, you know, everything that that we are talking about isn’t possible or didn’t happen. And one thing they say is that the thermite that was discovered in your in your research is actually a natural occurring nano thermite that was created by the collapse of the buildings themselves.

Jack Etkin [00:38:17]:
In other words, the pressures and etcetera actually created a thermite dust.

Niels Harrit [00:38:22]:
Well, this is a fundamental misunderstanding in violation of basic chemical principles Because it’s true, like the cladding, the towers were they were covered aluminum, and people say aluminum was brought in by the airliners. And, of course, if you have a steel frame, the it is rusty once in a while.

Jack Etkin [00:38:43]:
And nanothermite is just that, a loo a mixture of aluminum and rust.

Niels Harrit [00:38:47]:
It is not just that. It is much more than that. And because it’s the mix of the ingredients, it is like because you have potatoes here and you have meat here, you do not have a stew, do you? And there’s no just eating the potatoes and eating the meat does not give you what you would experience by eating the stew, and it’s the same thing here. I usually tell a little story, a little picture, a little another about matches, ordinary matches. They’re made of of wood. There’s a little sulfur in on the top of the individual match. It’s kept together by a binder. They are pulverized glass in the top of it, and there’s phosphorus on the side of the box when you strike the match.

Niels Harrit [00:39:39]:
Now imagine you have a campfire and you throw into the fire some small pieces of wood, a little sulfur, a little pulverized glass, a little phosphorus. Now would you expect the next morning in the ashes to find a box of magic in the fire? And it’s the same thing here. Just because you’re having ingredients, do not they will not come together to make a reactive mixture and this fundamental chemistry. You cannot form a reactive material at high temperature. It would you cannot. Getting reactive material like matches by just mixing the ingredients at high temperature in the campfire. So so so this is to to imagine this is a violation of basic chemical properties.

Jack Etkin [00:40:36]:
Okay. So the issue that the thermite is or the nanothermite was a naturally occurring dust is

Niels Harrit [00:40:44]:
carrying away. Provide the evidence. I mean, I know they will not be able to provide the eleventh because they are violating basic chemical principles. But, but then make the experiments.

Jack Etkin [00:40:56]:
Show us.

Niels Harrit [00:40:57]:
And yeah. And, actually, Eleventh Jones did these experiments. He took a rusted steel beam and he poured onto molten aluminum, which melts at 660 degrees centigrade. He poured molten aluminum on the rust and steel beam, and guess what happened? Nothing. So he did the experiment. He’s a great experimentalist.

Jack Etkin [00:41:18]:
Could the dust have come from somewhere, some other source than the dust of the collapsed buildings? Or or could it have been put in deliberately and somehow faked in order to

Niels Harrit [00:41:29]:
This is strange. When we were writing this this paper you were referring to earlier, 2 or 3 pages, I think, is reserved for this chain of custody thing. The very meticulous is documenting where the samples came from, who were the individuals collecting the samples, where were they collected, which time were they collected, and the statement has been signed by these individuals. Some of them had told on video actually, testified on video the collection. This chain of custody has been has been accounted for very accurately. I thought this was ridiculous when we wrote the manuscript because I have more than 60 scientific papers in the best journals and never have everybody, accused me of force falsifying samples? This is completely ridiculous. Now why should I falsify the sample? So I thought there was no reason to bring this in. But my fellow authors luckily insisted for this wrongdoing because what you’re saying is actually the only objections which have come up that the that the samples have been spiked or even fortified.

Niels Harrit [00:42:47]:
But due but due to this chain of custody, it’s virtually impossible unless somebody has been broken into the homes of these individual persons and actually put nanothermite into the samples. Now if this is the case,

Jack Etkin [00:43:03]:
wow. Yeah.

Niels Harrit [00:43:04]:
But how did they get it? How did they make it? Has the paper been It’s too far out.

Jack Etkin [00:43:08]:
Has the paper been published?

Niels Harrit [00:43:10]:
Yeah. Of course.

Jack Etkin [00:43:11]:
Okay.

Niels Harrit [00:43:12]:
Yeah. Our paper. Yeah. In an open chemistry journal. In an open journal.

Jack Etkin [00:43:16]:
If people want access to the to the paper itself, how can they find it?

Niels Harrit [00:43:20]:
Well, the very strange thing now as we are talking here, the whole journal has disappeared. This happened 3 days ago and we are on February 25th today, August 20th. And it’s happened 3 days ago that the whole journal disappeared. Together, I must say, maybe I should be a little careful because the journal disappeared from the web together with another journal called the Open Journal of Chemical Engineering Mathematics in which Kevin Joan Eleventh Jones and Kevin Ryan and others have made other publications related to 911. These two journals disappeared from from the server of the publisher. But the one the about chemical mechanical engineering mathematics, it has come back. So it may be that the journal we published in may come back also. And if this happens, it is directly accessible on the web.

Niels Harrit [00:44:20]:
And the link to it can be found on all the all the series 911 eleventh, So Like 9 9 eleventh, truth dot org.

Jack Etkin [00:44:31]:
Okay. eleventh and then type in nanothermite paper or something like that?

Niels Harrit [00:44:37]:
I guess that there there’s a link to this paper all over. Okay. And I hope it works, but as as of as of today, as of this moment, it has disappeared and, so I hope it is just an error. Yeah.

Jack Etkin [00:44:52]:
Is there a hard copy of the journal that gets mailed out? No. Oh, this is strictly an online

Niels Harrit [00:44:57]:
Yeah.

Jack Etkin [00:44:58]:
Journal. Theory journal in which your paper is published. Yeah.

Niels Harrit [00:45:01]:
There’s not a printer there’s not a printer, but this is this is not unusual. And we had four good reasons actually for selecting what we call an urban open online journal. One thing is that it is open. It’s free for everyone to download. Otherwise, the the conventional, the old time journals, you have to have an affiliation with the university or or a subscription, which is very, very expensive, or you have to go to a library in order to get it. But this time, everybody can download it. Point 2, the pub the paper the article itself is so long, and there are 33, I think, color pictures, figures in it, which will never be accepted if there had been a hard hard copy version of it. 3rd, we still have the copyrights of all the pictures, which is very important.

Niels Harrit [00:45:57]:
When I’m giving my presentation here in in Victoria, I can show the pictures from from the from the from the paper, which I could not do if it had been one of the old Times journal, but where the where the publisher actually had the copyrights of all the pictures. And 4th, my dean was on the external advisory board of of of this journal. My dean in Copenhagen, the National Faculty of National Sciences, was on the external advisory board of this journal, but he disappeared 4 days after the publication of our paper. He just disappeared from the board.

Jack Etkin [00:46:39]:
So lots of interesting things going on as we would unfortunately, as we would expect.

Niels Harrit [00:46:44]:
Oh, yeah. Yeah.

Jack Etkin [00:46:45]:
As we would expect.

Niels Harrit [00:46:46]:
Yeah. It’s dangerous. Information can be dangerous.

Jack Etkin [00:46:48]:
Yes.

Niels Harrit [00:46:49]:
Or both on an individual and a social level. You know? Adam and Eve was thrown out of paradise because they took a bite of what you call the tree of what do you call it in English? Adam and Eve in paradise. They ate from the tree of

Jack Etkin [00:47:05]:
Knowledge.

Niels Harrit [00:47:06]:
Knowledge. Okay. Knowledge of dangerous, so they were banned from paradise.

Jack Etkin [00:47:11]:
Once again, we just see the possibilities of, of how there is a force out here, out there that simply, I mean, since eleventh. And if if you look if you look at the even the news commentators on the day of eleventh, those reporters outside the buildings were talking about hearing explosions occurring. The firefighters were talking about it. The police were talking about it. And yet since the day after 9 eleventh, all of that material has simply been hidden away by the by the media and never reported again to the citizens of this country. So we have to ask ourselves again, what is going on here? And we have to ask that question very seriously of the entire power structure of this nation and what are they doing. Where can someone get nanothermite?

Niels Harrit [00:48:06]:
No way. This is not something you go out and buy. This is produced only in military facilities, in big military institutions in the world. It is it is the explosives of the future are based on this technology. We call them composite materials. And those who are working at it, they they brag about it as being explosives smaller, cheaper, and nastier than the old time explosives. So we know the research is going on, but it’s military research and you cannot buy it. This is high technology material.

Jack Etkin [00:48:48]:
So in other words, the the material of which you found dust from in the dust of the World Trade Center building collapses, is a military explosive? Yes.

Niels Harrit [00:49:02]:
Well, we still don’t know which role the what we found, we still do not know where it fits into the demolition scheme. And and I do not speculate in hypothetical blast scenarios. We know that the incendiaries were used for melting the steel structure, cutting the steel structure by a temperature. We know that explosives were used. This is just this is you can just see when you see the towers collapsing. You will see steel beams and and and girders being thrown up up in the air. We are talking about steel beams from 3 to 20 tons being thrown a 100 meters away and going like spikes into other beam, and they’re being thrown upwards. The forces involved in the collapse of the towers are in were enormous.

Niels Harrit [00:49:54]:
So we know explosions have been used. Explosives have been used.

Jack Etkin [00:49:59]:
In order to bring down the World Trade Centers 12 and 7 as

Niels Harrit [00:50:04]:
well. Absolutely. So we,

Jack Etkin [00:50:06]:
We know explosives were used. This is what he’s saying. And yet

Niels Harrit [00:50:10]:
Just watch. Yeah.

Jack Etkin [00:50:12]:
And yet, where is where is our media? Where are our politicians? If we know explosives were used, then what in the world is going on?

Niels Harrit [00:50:23]:
And, but we do not know where the red grid chips which we found fit into this whole picture. And I I’m sorry,

Jack Etkin [00:50:29]:
say that. We do not know where We

Niels Harrit [00:50:30]:
don’t know where where where the nano thermite fit into this picture. We do not know the exact role played by the the reactive remains we found. Actually, I believe that 2 kinds of incendiaries were used, but this is may this will be getting a little bit more complicated. So so I should not take my conclusions any further regarding the the nanothermite. It shouldn’t have been there, and it and this is never found in other demolitions, dust, or or fires, collapses. It’s not been known prior to 911.

Jack Etkin [00:51:08]:
You mean finding of nanothermite in the dust showing that it was Yeah.

Niels Harrit [00:51:12]:
This material. And and so we do not know exactly what it is, but somewhere out there, there must be somebody who knows exactly what it is. So if it was something innocent, I would expect them to come forward and tell us, this was just paint or something like that. But 2 years has gone by since the publication of our paper, and this hasn’t happened, which makes me very confident actually that that our conclusions are not that we haven’t overlooked something.

Jack Etkin [00:51:49]:
Now you’re on a speaking tour of Canada. Yeah. This is the, this is the very end of February when this interview is taking place, 26th I think.

Niels Harrit [00:51:58]:
Okay.

Jack Etkin [00:52:00]:
Where have you been in Canada, and where are you going?

Niels Harrit [00:52:03]:
Well, we started in Edmonton 4 days ago, and we have been to Vancouver the day before yesterday, and now we are in Victoria. And, we have met many wonderful people. I must also, we we took we started 3 days as a tourist in Toronto, and we have met so many wonderful people. And I hope this should be heard. The Canadians, you are theory friendly and wonderful people. Take that in. And so we are proceeding to, we’re flying back to Toronto, then I’ll give actually a regular chemistry presentation at University of McMaster on Monday. Tuesday, I’ll give my the nanothermite presentation also at McMaster.

Niels Harrit [00:52:51]:
We’ll go to the University of and Ontario in London and we’ll go to University of Toronto and this will be it. So it’s a total of 7 presentations on this tour.

Jack Etkin [00:53:04]:
How have the crowds been where you have spoken? I believe you’ve spoken even

Niels Harrit [00:53:06]:
Very, very receptive and and and and very open. And this, I I’ve learned, is another, very nice, would you say, property of of Canadian communities then they’re actually open and responsive and, ready to listen. And, also, the the the the gap between actually, the jump, the leap between, realizing something and taking action is a big leap. And in Denmark, many many many people understand that they just don’t move. And, Daniel Ellsberg, the very famous activist back from the Vietnam War, has said, I have learned about my my my fellow citizens that they they understand, they learned, and then they proceed to neglect it. And this, I I would say, goes to the Danes, but apparently the Canadians, the the the they actually my impression, they’re more easier for them actually to react.

Jack Etkin [00:54:13]:
Well, let’s hope we do. Yes. Unfortunately, we’re almost out of time. Doctor Harr, just one last question. Thank you. Why are you doing this?

Niels Harrit [00:54:22]:
Well, I’m opposed to crime. I’m against crime. I think crime should be investigated, and eventually, the criminals should be convicted and put in court. And this hasn’t happened in terms of the terror attacks on 911. There has not been an an ordinary criminal investigation. So this is one thing. Another thing is that I have 6 grandchildren. And in 10 years time, they may be old enough to ask me, grandfather, which side were you on? And I’m gonna tell him I was on your side.

Jack Etkin [00:55:05]:
We’ve been talking to doctor Nils Harritt of the University of Copenhagen. We’ve been talking about a very important subject, eleventh. Thank you very much for watching, and please please keep this issue in mind always because we have got to come to the proper conclusions about what happened on eleventh. It’s simply too important to do nothing about. Thank you for watching face to face.