The Tucker Carlson Show - The 9/11 Files: From Cover-up to Conspiracy

All Episodes

Oct. 14, 2025 - The Tucker Carlson Show

29:05

The 9/11 Files: From Cover-up to Conspiracy | Ep 4

Participants

Main voices

tucker carlson

22:49

Appearances

michael scheuer

03:11

Clips

brit hume

00:10

donald j trump

00:29

jimmy dore

00:06

john kiriakou

00:31

ron johnson

00:09

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		If you wanted conspiracy theories to flourish after the 9-11 attacks, here's what you'd do.
		You'd suppress video evidence of the attacks themselves.
		You'd ship the rubble from the attacks overseas immediately without looking at it.
		You'd call everyone who disputed the official narrative crazy or a criminal.
		You'd engage in a campaign of very obvious lies about the attacks.
		You'd do everything you could to prevent an actual investigation into what happened.
		You'd avoid any public trials.
		And when you captured and killed the perpetrator, you'd show no photos or video evidence of the raid that killed him, and then you'd dump his body into the middle of the ocean.
		Then you'd use the attack to justify the invasion of a completely unrelated country on behalf of a foreign power.
		In other words, you'd do exactly what the U.S. government did in the wake of 9-11.
		It's possible that there are people who wanted conspiracy theories to thrive.
		The more far out, the better.
		The more time people spend wondering about directed energy weapons, the less time they focus on the obvious, the facts hiding in plain sight.
		And the main fact that they are ignoring is our government's central role in facilitating those attacks.
		We established this in episode one of this series, and the extreme levels of incompetence that made it possible for bin Laden from Kandahar, Afghanistan, to pull off the most sophisticated terror attacks in history.
		On the other hand, not all the wildest theories about 9-11 are crazy.
		Some of them raise legitimate questions about what happened.
		And this episode will go through those theories one by one and explain using primary source documents, interviews with CIA officials, contemporary news reports, exactly what we know about those theories.
		The North Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed at 1028 a.m. on the morning of 9-11.
		And when it did, burning debris fell and damaged several of the buildings around it, including a building called World Trade Center, Building No.
		It was a 47-story steel frame high-rise located about a football field's length away on the other side of Vesey Street.
		Interestingly, there was a building between the North Tower and Building 7.
		That building did not collapse.
		The collapse of Building 7 is completely unaddressed in the 9-11 Commission report.
		577 pages, but no explanation as to why Building 7 fell.
		And that provoked very obvious questions.
		People have been talking about it for the last 24 years.
unidentified		And if you watch some of these pieces, you can actually see them turning to dust before they hit the ground.
jimmy dore ▲ ● ▼		A steel building doesn't fall into its own footprint because the plane hit another building a couple hundred yards away.
unidentified		I think the plane hit the first building, the second building displayed.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		The circumstances around Building 7's collapse and the near total absence of an explanation for why it collapsed provoked in the end a Senate investigation.
ron johnson ▲ ● ▼		Start with Building 7.
ron johnson ▲ ● ▼		Again, I don't know that you can find structural engineers that would say that that thing didn't come down in any other way than a controlled demolition.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		Building 7 had a pretty amazing list of tenants.
		They included, ironically, the New York City Office of Emergency Management.
		That would be the agency responsible for responding to the 9-11 attacks.
		On the 9th and 10th floors of Building 7 were the New York Field Office of the United States Secret Service.
		The equipment and records they kept there were destroyed that day when the building collapsed.
		The building's 25th floor was home to a secret CIA office.
		Its records were also destroyed.
		Across the 25th floor was the Department of Defense office.
		It's unclear exactly what it was doing there.
		Building 7 was one of just three buildings that collapsed that day.
		The collapse of the other two, the Twin Towers, got extensive coverage in the 9-11 report, of course.
		But Building 7 was almost entirely ignored.
		It's worth remembering that even on the morning of the 9-11 attacks, there were very prominent people already doubting whether a plane could take down a steel frame building.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I said, how could a plane, even a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been?
		How could it possibly go through this deal?
		I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously, because I just can't imagine anything being able to go through that wall.
		It just seemed to me that to do that kind of destruction is even more than a big plane, because you're talking about taking out steel, the heaviest caliber steel that was used on a building.
		I mean, these buildings were rock solid.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		One reason the 9-11 Commission may have effectively ignored the collapse of Tower 7 is because even now we don't really know much about it.
		On the morning of September 11th, Lower Manhattan was cut off from the public with military-style checkpoints.
		World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed that afternoon at 5 20 p.m.
		Video that has been widely circulated appears to show it falling symmetrically into its own footprint.
		Several buildings closer to the Twin Towers, meanwhile, remain standing.
		That's odd.
		And then the debris was removed immediately and shipped to Asia.
		That's even stranger.
unidentified		Where is all the rubble gone?
		And have you have you been able to and is there any way you can answer that question?
		I'm sorry, Peter, I didn't get the question.
		Okay, I apologize.
		Jackie Judd and several other people keep asking us when you look at where the towers used to stand, there is surprisingly so little rubble.
		Where did all the rubble go?
		It's a very good question, Peter, and I have asked some people who've been doing some of the rescue and recovery work this morning.
		If you look behind me, you can see the very remains, the skeletal remains of the World Trade Center.
		And one volunteer, Robert Gerlinski, explained to me the reason there's so little rubble is that all of it simply fell down into the ground and was pulverized, evaporated.
		Now I should say though, for the last several hours, there's been a steady stream of dump trucks and other very large vehicles carrying out debris.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		According to a New York Times article published five months after the attacks, quote, an unknown number of steel columns has been sent off to mills as far away as Asia without ever having been examined or saved.
		This made it nearly impossible for engineers to answer the monumental questions of exactly why and how the buildings, designed to sustain a jet impact, completely collapsed.
		To the extent that any analysis of the debris was done at all, it was done by volunteers at a scrapyard in Jersey City, New Jersey.
		According to the New York Times, the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation involves extremely thin bits of steel collected from the trade towers and from Seven World Trade Center, a 47-story high rise that also collapsed for unknown reasons.
		The steel apparently melted away, but no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright.
		Two agencies investigated the collapse.
		One was FEMA, which relied on volunteers, and the other was NIST, the National Institute for Standards and Technology funded by Congress.
		FEMA's explanation is that falling debris from the North Tower damaged the outer facade of Building 7 and started a series of fires in the lower floors.
		According to NIST, the collapse of the towers in the morning had damaged water mains, so the building's sprinkler systems failed.
		Since the building had been evacuated earlier in the morning, and the fire department's resources were stretched to a breaking point by ongoing search and rescue missions, fire chiefs made the decision early on not to fight the fires that were burning in Building 7.
		According to the NIST report, thermal expansion of steel beams, not the complete melting of steel, caused the connections tying a crucial girder, girder 2001A, to column 79, and that joint failed.
		The girder walked six and a quarter inches off its seat, and that precipitated what is known as a progressive collapse.
		That means that the collapse started in one area and then spread downward due to gravity through the rest of the building.
		That's the explanation.
		There are two questions that come to mind and both are obvious.
		First, if there was just one failure point, then why does video evidence show the building coming down symmetrically all at once at free fall acceleration?
		And what more closely resembles what's called a global collapse, where all the supporting columns are severed simultaneously.
		The second question is: how have other steel frame buildings around the world, similar in design to that in Tower 7, fared during fires?
		In 1991, for example, the 38-story 1 Meridian Plaza in Philadelphia had an eight-floor fire that burned for 18 hours.
		and yet the building didn't collapse.
		In 1988, the 62-story first interstate bank building in Los Angeles had a massive fire that started on the 12th floor.
		There was no structural failure.
		In 2017, the 24-story Grenfell Tower in London burned for over 24 hours, and yet the internal steel withstood the fire.
		So why then did building 7 collapse after just seven Hours of burning, in a way that no steel frame building anywhere in the world has ever collapsed.
		With the support of a group called Architects and Engineers for 9-11 truth, Professor Leroy Hulsey of the University of Alaska at Fairbanks conducted an independent study whose findings were released in 2020.
		Professor Hulsey found that office fires of the kind in Building 7 on 9-11 could not have produced sufficient thermal expansion to cause the crucial girder to fail.
		It's impossible, he found.
		And more significantly, he and his team found that NIST's explanation does not account for what anyone can see on video, which is that the entire building came down all at once.
		Not in a progressive collapse, but in a total collapse.
		Something else, therefore, must have triggered the downfall.
		There's only one thing that could have triggered a collapse like the one we saw on television, and that is a controlled demolition.
		That was his conclusion.
		Our ability to analyze the collapse is limited by the video that we have.
		We don't have footage of the south side of the building where the fires were, because the cameras there were likely destroyed or obstructed by the collapse of the Twin Towers.
		One issue with the controlled demolition hypothesis is that the widely circulated video of the building coming down is selectively edited.
		In fact, the building did not exactly collapse all at once.
		It came down in two stages.
		What you're seeing now is the full video of the collapse.
		It shows the penthouse collapsing first, and then very quickly the rest of the building going.
		The unedited video leaves more questions than it answers.
		It calls into question the official NIST narrative, but it doesn't conclusively show a controlled demolition either.
		Because of how quickly authorities ship the rubble overseas, we did not get a thorough investigation into the destruction.
		But one group of scientists did collect and test four samples of dust and debris collected by a Manhattan resident about 10 minutes after the collapse of the Second World Trade Center Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
		In 2009, they published the results of their study in the Open Chemical Physic Journal.
		In those samples, the scientists found distinctive red gray chips full of highly energetic and thermitic material.
		In other words, they found traces of explosive compounds.
		To its credit, NIST's report did investigate multiple hypothetical blast scenarios, but found it would be impossible to carry out on any floor in the building without detection.
		That would have required removing or cutting columns with welding torches and placing wires for demolition.
		NIST found that window breakage patterns on visible floors was not at all like expected from a blast.
		NIST did not test residue from the attacks for thermite, but did note that thermite burns slowly relative to explosive materials and would require several minutes in contact with a massive steel section to heat it to a temperature that would result in substantial weakening.
		Additionally, they estimated that at least 0.13 pounds of thermite would be required to heat each pound of steel section to approximately 700 degrees Celsius, the temperature at which steel weakens substantially.
		Which means that if building seven were demolished using thermite, many thousands of pounds of thermite would need to have been placed inconspicuously ahead of time, remotely ignited and somehow held in direct contact with the surface of hundreds of massive structural components to weaken the building, making it an unlikely substance for achieving a controlled demolition.
		NIST also says that an explosion big enough to take down the building would have been considerably louder than any noises recorded around the time the building collapsed.
		Yet eyewitness accounts say they did hear explosions inside the building.
unidentified		All this time, I'm hearing all types of explosions.
unidentified		All this time, I'm hearing explosions.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		We attempted to interview that witness.
		His name was Barry Jennings.
		But he died at the untimely age of 53, just two days before NIST released its report on Tower 7.
		The film director Spike Lee attempted to cover this story in an HBO docu-series entitled NYC Epicenters 9-11 to 2021 and a half.
		In an interview with the New York Times, Lee said the amount of heat that it takes to make steel melt, that temperature's not reached.
		And then the juxtaposition of the way the Building 7 fell to the ground, when you put it next to other building collapses that were demolitions, it's like you're looking at the same thing.
		For saying this, Lee was excoriated by the press, which usually lionizes him.
		He suggested that the official 911 narrative might be wrong.
		And for doing so, he was called an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist by the times of Israel.
		In the end, Lee re edited his docuseries and removed portions that were skeptical of the official story of the collapse of Building 7.
		Where do you keep your most valuable possessions?
		Not your necktie or a pair of socks, but things you wouldn't want to replace or maybe couldn't.
		Heirlooms from your parents, your birth certificate, your firearms, your grandfather's shotgun.
		Where do you store those?
		Under the bed?
		In the back of a closet?
		No.
		That's unwise and maybe unsafe.
		Liberty Safe is the place to store them.
		I would know I have a colonial safe from Liberty Safe.
		It's in my garage, it's the best.
		I keep everything in there.
		It's a ProFlex system, allows you to design the inside of your safe in a way that works for you.
		It's not a fixed setup.
		Someone else puts the shelves in and you have to deal with it.
		You make it the way you want it.
		Have a stock of rifles, you can make room.
		Need more shelves for handguns, for documents, for valuables, for gold.
		You can do whatever you want.
		You can refigure your safe in minutes.
		Maximum flexibility, maximum convenience.
		Liberty Safe is America's number one safe company made in the United States.
		Great people, I know them.
		Visit LibertySafe.com, use the code Tucker10 at checkout for 10% off.
		Franklin and Colonial SAIS featuring the ProFlex interior that you customize.
		You're gonna dig it.
		We definitely plus they're good looking, I will say.
		Another unusual aspect of Building 7's collapse is that some media outlets reported it happened before it actually happened.
		Here's footage of the BBC reporting that Tower 7 was down.
		Keep in mind, this was filmed live 20 minutes before Building 7 actually collapsed.
unidentified		Jane, what more can you tell us about the Solomon Brothers building and its collapse?
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		Solomon Brothers was Building 7's major tenant, and you can see the tower in the background of the shot.
		Was that just rushed reporting on the day of the attacks?
		Or did the BBC have advanced word that the building was coming down?
		If the media did have foreknowledge of the events that day, they weren't alone.
		Buried deep in the 9-11 Commission report on page 499, one easily missed footnote says there was a surge in put options, investments that profit when stock prices fall.
		These put options were put against United Airlines parent company, and they were placed on September 6th, and then against American Airlines on September 10th.
		Incredibly, the report goes on to note that 95% of the trade against United Airlines was made by a single U.S.-based institutional investor.
		So who was that investor?
		Well, we don't know.
		The U.S. government is still hiding his name.
		They refused to tell us.
		Why?
		No one will say.
		The commission report says an investigation by the FBI found out the trades were, quote, innocuous, whatever that means.
		Researchers have since discovered that these trades are far from innocuous, with trading volumes showing statistical significance, massive statistical significance.
		There were other trades too.
		On September 7th, the number of put options placed against British Airways was four times the normal volume.
		The number of put options against American Airlines on the day before the attack was 285 times the normal volume.
		In the days before the attacks, put options surged against Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch.
		Both banks had sizable offices in the World Trade Center.
		There were also notable surges in gold and oil call options in advance of the attacks.
		But who could have known the attacks were coming, apart from Al-Qaeda?
		One highly significant yet often overlooked aspect of the 9-11 attacks is that foreign intel agencies, including those of ostensible allies, likely had detailed prior knowledge of the event.
john kiriakou ▲ ● ▼		These 9-11 hijackers had come from Germany.
		Were the Germans asleep at the switch?
		Or did they just not tell us anything about these people?
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		John Kiriakou was chief of counterintelligence on the Bin Laden unit.
john kiriakou ▲ ● ▼		What about the Israelis?
		What about the Saudis?
		There is solid evidence that members of the Saudi royal family were working with Al-Qaeda terrorists.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		The 9-11 Commission, not surprisingly, ignored this subject altogether.
		Here's what we know.
		As early as January of 2001, France's foreign intelligence service learned that Al-Qaeda was planning a hijacking plot involving a U.S. airline.
		What did the French tell the United States and when?
		We don't know.
		But the French are not alone.
		Others knew.
michael scheuer ▲ ● ▼		Well, there's no doubt that the Israelis and probably the British had better information than the people working against Osama bin Laden and the agency.
michael scheuer ▲ ● ▼		Much better information.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		Michael Scheuer ran the CIA's Bin Laden unit in the late 1990s.
		One reason foreign governments may have had superior information is that the NSA frequently shared signals intelligence details with them, details it withheld from our own CIA.
		Signals intelligence is a type of espionage that deals with intercepting phone calls and radio communications.
michael scheuer ▲ ● ▼		We needed the collection of signals intelligence out of Afghanistan.
		I understand.
		And since there was no central telephone company or communications companies, it was very uh limited.
		Uh you had to be lucky to find the signal.
		Well, we found a couple of signals, and we shared the information with NSA.
		Uh, and uh they collected information and wouldn't share it with us in the uh in the raw form.
		Um NSA reports are generally summaries of what people say over the phone.
		You don't really know always who's talking to who.
		The first thing we did when we got the first copies of uh translated material, we sent them to NSA and said, can you please provide the other half of this to us?
		And they said, Thank you very much, but under the 1947 act that created NSA, we don't have to share that with anyone, and we're not going to.
		But somehow the Israelis and the Saudis always were able to find out something was there that they wanted.
		And so when we refused, they'd call the White House, the White House had called the DCI, and the DCI would say give it to them.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		We know very little about NSA's foreknowledge of 9-11 because the 9-11 Commission barely investigated it.
		Keep in mind the NSA is the largest American Intel agency by far.
		And yet the Commission never assigned a staff member to research NSA files, in part because some of the 9-11 commissioners and staff simply did not understand what the NSA was and what it did.
		Even now, the NSA's terrorism archives still have never been thoroughly reviewed by outside investigators.
		If someone ever did go through those files, they'd likely find a treasure trove of previously undisclosed warnings about the 9-11 attacks.
		The NSA was the primary agency responsible for monitoring the switchboard through which Al-Qaeda operatives communicated with each other.
michael scheuer ▲ ● ▼		It's certainly an absurdity for what the American people pay for signals intelligence to be collected, uh translated, and supplied to the intelligence community to have the British, the Saudis, the Israelis getting information from our National Security Agency that we are we and the agency were not privileged enough to get.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		A number of foreign governments may have had foreknowledge of 9-11, but the Israeli government stands out in particular, and here's why.
		On the morning of 9-11, a group of five Israeli nationals purported to have witnessed the initial explosion of the World Trade Center and were seen to be celebrating the event.
		At the time, the celebrations received quite a bit of mainstream media coverage.
brit hume ▲ ● ▼		Fox News has learned some U.S. investigators believe that there are Israelis again very much engaged in spying in and on the U.S., who may have known things they didn't tell us before September 11th.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		It's striking to see operatives from a supposedly allied country celebrating the mass murder of Americans.
		But it is true that some in Israel saw the attack as a good thing for them.
		A September 12th, 2001 article in the New York Times quotes now Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responding to the 9-11 attacks, quote, it is very good, before adding, well, not very good, but it will generate immediate sympathy.
		Netanyahu predicted that the attack would strengthen the bond between our two peoples, because we've experienced terror over so many decades, but the United States has now experienced a massive hemorrhaging of terror.
		According to FBI documents, the Israelis caught celebrating the 9-11 attacks Had videotaped the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center and may have possessed foreknowledge of the same.
		When the Israelis were arrested in New Jersey, they were carrying box cutters, multiple passports, thousands of dollars in cash, and photos of themselves smiling with the World Trade Center burning in the background.
michael scheuer ▲ ● ▼		The Israelis are always for the Israelis first.
		Last, always.
		They don't like the United States except for the most part, our money.
		And yet, uh our National Security Agency is producing information for them but not shareable with its own people.
		Go figure.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		According to FBI records, polygraph tests administered by the FBI suggested that they did not have foreknowledge of the attacks, but did engage in deception and were likely involved in illegal foreign counterintelligence.
		They were spying in the United States.
		The leader of the group, a man called Dominic Suter, fled to Israel on or around September 14th, 2001, immediately, and he was later included on an FBI anti-terror watch list distributed to European allies in May of 2002.
		Most of the Israelis were held in FBI detention for two and a half months before they were deported for visa violations, a common way to expel foreign intel assets from Allied countries.
john kiriakou ▲ ● ▼		The Israelis pride themselves on having infiltrated every Arab intelligence service.
		Every terrorist group.
		Did the Israelis know about 9-11 and not tell us?
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		One memorandum submitted to the 9-11 Commission presented substantial evidence suggesting that numerous art students from Israel, who were in fact Israeli Intel assets, have been strategically located across the United States.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		It's hard not to notice that they lived near the future 9/11 hijackers.
michael scheuer ▲ ● ▼		There were groups of Israelis traveling around the country as artists.
		Sketching things happened to be one time around Cape Canaveral, I remember, and other places where there were certainly things to paint and sketch, but also noticeably near military installations or some other kind of installation in the government.
		So I think that's an open question yet.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		The so-called Israeli art students centered their operations in Hollywood, Florida and northern New Jersey.
		Those are the exact locations of the hijackers before the attack.
		According to the memorandum, quote, it is very difficult to believe, based on the existing evidence and the location of their common central operating bases that this group was not tracking the future hijackers and their collaborators as well.
		According to the Ford, a Jewish publication, quote, the Israeli government acknowledged the operation and apologized for not coordinating it with Washington.
		Within a week of the attack, Israeli intelligence officials claimed they warned the United States about large-scale terror attacks on highly visible targets in the United States.
		But the specifics of those warnings have never been made public.
		There's no evidence they happened.
michael scheuer ▲ ● ▼		In fact, in the whole time I worked in counterterrorism from'92 till 2004, I never saw one piece of information from the Israelis that was really worth anything.
tucker carlson ▲ ● ▼		As Americans, we need Washington to create a new truly independent commission, one that does not lie, and that instead investigates what happened on 9-11 and answers the questions we've posed in this episode.
		Who made the decision to ship the debris from the attacks out of this country immediately?
		And why?
		What was the role of the CIA office in Building 7?
		What signals intelligence did the NSA have in relation to the plot?
		And how much of it did they share with foreign governments?
		What did those foreign governments know and fail to tell the United States?
		The American public deserves answers immediately to those questions.
		These are all questions 9-11 Commission itself ignored.
		Why did the FBI's most wanted poster for Osama bin Laden, updated in November of 2001, omit any mention of the 9-11 attacks?
		Why did it take the government five years to release footage of the Pentagon?
		And why were there only two publicly available videos of the Pentagon crash?
		The Pentagon was one of the most heavily secured and surveilled buildings on planet Earth.
		And yet, even now, more than 20 years later, there are only two videos.
		Why did U.S. forces abruptly bury Osama bin Laden at sea and never release any photograph of his body?
		How hard, by the way, would it Be for amateur pilots with only basic aviation training and no experience flying jumbo jets to navigate to lower Manhattan and crash into a building.
		The majority of hijackers were flagged for additional screening at the airport.
		How did they get on those watch lists?
		And why didn't security slow them down?
		Why wasn't there substantial wreckage of Flight 93 at its supposed crash site in Shankville, Pennsylvania?
		We were told the crash of that aircraft was so powerful that it vaporized the aircraft's hull, and yet the hijackers' passports were found intact at the site.
		How does that work?
		And who was being protected by the Commission's unwillingness to answer these questions?
		Someone was.
		None of these questions were even asked by the 9-11 Commission.
		It's time that someone asked them and that the government answers them.
		On September 11, 2001, nearly 3,000 people were murdered.
		In the years that followed, hundreds of thousands more perished as a result of our response to those attacks.
		The government enacted measures that suspended constitutional protections, the freedoms this country was created to protect.
		They're gone now.
		The government employed illegal warfare tactics, including torture and the murder of innocent individuals.
		Those attacks fundamentally altered the way America operates, the way all of us live here.
		And yet not everyone suffered in the aftermath of 9-11.
		Some emerged the winners.
		Reveal who profited from 9-11 in the next installment of our series.
		that we went to to bring you this documentary.
		You can read along as you watch.
		Join us today at TuckerCarlson.com for the whole series all at once to support our investigative work.
		We couldn't do any of this without our members.
		We're grateful for you.

▲