2011 Toronto Hearings and 2012 Toronto Report — catalogue

Observation

A 2011 academic/legal hearing produced an 18-chapter 2012 report arguing the official account is false. Eleven chapters are objects in this lab; seven are title-catalogued.

Interpretation

A hearing panel is not a court and not NIST. Further-investigation recommendations are not findings of fact.

Source text

9/11 Toronto Report (2012), ed. James Gourley. Hearings 11–14 Sep 2011, Ryerson University.

Introduction — James Gourley
Ch.1 Testimony of Lorie Van Auken and Bob McIlvaine [RETRIEVED]
Ch.2 Anomalies in the 9/11 Commission Report — David Ray Griffin [RETRIEVED]
Ch.3 Why the NIST World Trade Center Reports are False — Kevin R. Ryan [RETRIEVED]
Ch.4 Seeing 9/11 from Above: SCADs — Lance deHaven-Smith (title-catalogued)
Ch.5 9/11 as a Deep Event: How CIA Personnel Helped Allow It to Happen — Peter Dale Scott [RETRIEVED]
Ch.6 Evidence of Insider Trading before September 11th Re-examined — Paul Zarembka [RETRIEVED]
Ch.7 Anomalies in the Official Accounts of American 77 and United 93 — David Ray Griffin [RETRIEVED]
Ch.8 Eyewitness Evidence of Explosions in the Twin Towers — Graeme MacQueen [RETRIEVED]
Ch.9 WTC 7: A Refutation of NIST's Analysis — David Chandler [RETRIEVED]
Ch.10 Evidence for Extreme Temperatures at the World Trade Center — Kevin R. Ryan [RETRIEVED]
Ch.11 The Official Collapse Narrative and the Experimental Method — Jonathan H. Cole, P.E. (title-catalogued)
Ch.12 Advanced Pyrotechnic or Explosive Material Discovered in WTC Dust — Richard Gage, Gregg Roberts, Andrea Dreger [RETRIEVED]
Ch.13 Evidence of Explosives at the Pentagon — Barbara Honegger [RETRIEVED]
Ch.14 In Denial of Democracy — Laurie A. Manwell (title-catalogued)
Ch.15 Reflections on the Toronto Hearings — David A. Johnson (title-catalogued)
Ch.16 Strengths and Weaknesses of the Toronto Hearings — Herbert Jenkins (title-catalogued)
Ch.17 Remarks on the Toronto Hearings — Richard B. Lee (title-catalogued)
Ch.18 Report on the Toronto Hearings — Ferdinando Imposimato (title-catalogued)

Panel reconvened after the hearings to decide which aspects deserved further investigation. A hearing recommendation is not a verdict.

Hypothesis linkage

• H021weakly supportsseeded

  The hearings exist as a competing enquiry product, not as proof the Commission failed.