Peter Michael Ketcham: First Interview.


By Jerry Alatalo

eter Michael Ketcham, a professional mathematician who worked at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for fourteen years (1997-2011), first spoke out publicly in January 2017 in opposition to his former employer’s investigation of 9/11. Eight months have passed since his explosive (pun absolutely intended) entry into the controversy surrounding events on September 11, 2001, and Mr. Ketcham has astonishingly not been interviewed – until now.

Mr. Ketcham hasn’t received any requests from representatives of America’s largest media corporation such as FOX, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, New York Times, Washington Post or other similarly well-known organizations. This is particularly mystifying since his stance is genuine, academically focused and sincere as an advocate for a new investigation of 9/11, the most consequential event for America – for the entire world – of the 21st century.

In his first published interview Mr. Ketcham notes that he’s seen no mention of his name, much less his story related to 9/11, anywhere in the corporate media. If the so-called “mainstream media” and its intentional choice of not interviewing Peter Michael Ketcham weren’t disturbing enough, it might be noted that independent media groups operating on the internet have not talked to him in the period January-September 2017.

The choice to ignore him by CNN, MSNBC, New York Times, etc. is not really so surprising given the enormity of the issue; were the truth about 9/11 to come out for all the world to know, the effects would transform societies today in such a powerful way that future generations would also feel the consequences. While considering Peter Michael Ketcham’s widely shared opinion that only a new investigation of 9/11 can lead to the necessary healing of wounds inflicted on the day of the events and the sixteen years since, one cannot but conclude the consequences are, despite the initial experiencing of discomfort and/or pain present in any healing process, overwhelmingly of a positive nature.

Recent 9/11-related developments offer hope to the increasing number of people around the Earth, now in the many millions, that the exposing of truth is very close. University of Alaska-Fairbanks engineering Professor Leroy Hulsey’s study concluding Building 7 did not collapse due to office fires clearly represents new information supporting the push for a new investigation.

Efforts to gain sponsors and passage in the U.S. Congress of the “Bobby McIlvaine Act” is another major and promising action. Bobby McIlvaine perished on 9/11 under circumstances clearly calling into question the official narrative contained in the 9/11 Commission Report. The proposed legislation asks for a new investigation, and was named after the son of 9/11 justice activist Bob McIlvaine Sr..

The inexplicable 9/11 position of John Kiriakou

Truthdig posted a 2-hour talk by Chris Hedges on their YouTube channel (197,000 views) where we challenged him and Truthdig on 9/11 in the comments section, suggesting they interview Peter Michael Ketcham. That led to an exchange of comments with a hostile “believer” of the official 9/11 Commission narrative.

Shortly afterward Truthdig interviewed torture whistleblower John Kiriakou and posted on YT, where among other issues he shared his opinion of 9/11.

Looking closely at (2) interviews of Kiriakou on YouTube, one from 2015 – “Why Didn’t Bush-Cheney Prevent 9/11? Ex CIA John Kiriakou” – and the Truthdig (2017) post – “CIA Whistleblower John Kiriakou Answers Questions About 9/11, JFK’s Death and More!” – is a revealing and disturbing endeavor, pointing to the possibility of his being consciously involved in 9/11 disinformation.

In the 2015 interview Kiriakou responds to host Paul Jay of The Real News Network after Jay mentions explosives by immediately saying “no explosives”. He mentions Cofer Black, his CIA superior and a highest level counter-intelligence officer, as knowing “something big” was coming at a meeting Kiriakou attended before 9/11. If one listens closely to the questions from Jay and the consistent side-stepping, directional/subject changes and/or failure to directly address Jay’s specific requests for response explicit in his questions, it seems clear Kiriakou is intentionally evasive.

Illustrating only one example of many in that 2015 interview, Jay brought up the now-famous Project for a New American Century (PNAC) documents about “a new Pearl Harbor”, which Kiriakou then passed over completely.

In the 2017 Truthdig interview, after being asked if he “ever entertained the idea that 9/11 was an inside job” Kiriakou immediately responded with “No .. Nothing …The intelligence was crystal clear.” He goes on to say Building 7 should be investigated, perhaps because in 2017 there is no chance of being taken seriously if defending the Building 7 NIST “conclusions”; almost the entire world knows the report is severely flawed. Mr. Kiriakou does not volunteer his reasoning for coming to believe Building 7 deserves investigation; in particular, he does not mention explosives or controlled demolition, nor otherwise offer any opinion on the cause of Building 7’s collapse.

Regarding explosives or thermite used on the Twin Towers, his response was “a lot of that is nonsense … a lot of it is interesting and true … coincidental”.

In both the 2015 and 2017 interviews Kiriakou defers to his (former?) boss Cofer Black as the foundational truth or basis for continuing his assertion of the government narrative that the terrorist hijackers – not any “inside job” – were responsible for Towers 1 and 2. His continued insistence on denying the use of explosives on 9/11 – when 2nd, 3rd and 4th graders have watched Graeme MacQueen’s 40-minute presentation clearly showing proof of explosives use at last fall’s AE911Truth Justice in Focus event – is simply unbelievable.

Famed Iran-Contra lead attorney Daniel Sheehan addressed last fall’s AE911Truth Justice in Focus event along with Professor Graeme MacQueen, and many others. During one of Daniel Sheehan’s lectures at University of California-Santa Cruz, posted at “Romero Institute” YouTube channel, he shared with his students that he considered Cofer Black (paraphrasing) someone to watch with regard to nefarious activities carried out by the deep state.

Either Kiriakou is a 9/11 disinformation operative or he’s not. Through his pattern of asserting “no explosions on 9/11”, when clear evidence of explosions on that day is readily and easily available, a massive red flag has become raised.

Mr. Kiriakou needs to become pushed hard on 9/11. Perhaps Mr. Ray McGovern, Mr. William Binney, Ms. Coleen Rowley and other concerned truth warriors of high moral stature can act forcefully in the clearly righteous cause of seeking total clarification.

While Peter Michael Ketcham only participated in his first published interview after eight months of being fully ignored, in contrast John Kiriakou receives extensive media attention, and been interviewed many times. Comparing the 9/11 narrative of Peter Michael Ketcham to that of John Kiriakou is experientially like watching the collapse of Building 7 for the first time. Eventually people come to the realization that office fires couldn’t possibly have caused that – and conclude Building 7’s collapse occurs exactly like a controlled demolition.

Their intuitions tell them that something is very seriously wrong here.

(Thank you to April Watters at YouTube)

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Peter Michael Ketcham: First Interview.

  1. I guess all that can be done now is for all interested and “in the know” parties to keep pushing, digging and revealing the truth as they know it. Good article, and video.

    Like

    1. Sha’Tara,
      Thank you. To be honest, it’s unimaginable what constrains people from breaking out in righteous indignation when it comes to the monumental 9/11 tragedy. Of course, we’re not referring to what transpired on the day itself, but the cowardly 16 year silence, turning away, and inaction on the criminal coverup by America’s so-called elected “leaders”. Thankfully this sad, sad chapter on Earth is about to close.

      Like

    1. Stuart,
      Hello. Chris Hedges recently interviewed a historian where Martin Luther King’s name was raised, and neither Hedges or the historian (Mr. Foner, if not mistaken) acknowledged the 1999 civil case led by attorney for the King family and friend of MLK in the last year of King’s life, William Pepper. Certainly both men must have been aware of that civil trial, in which the jury found James Earl Ray innocent and that the government/military/intelligence conspired to assassinate.

      Sadly, if Hedges keeps knowledge to himself on matters such as the murder of MLK by the government, he’s not likely to share what he knows about 9/11. One supposes everyone has their own decisions to make on these issues, but whether one believes in karma or not, it’s one hell of a gamble from a wrong-right and/or spiritual perspective to remain silent when action in the form of speaking out is the only moral choice.

      Thank you.

      Like

        1. One has to wonder when certain individuals’ truth telling becomes limited and the limits are self-imposed. What makes gaging or analyzing these situations even further puzzling is the people are otherwise strong voices. 9/11 truth and justice is the standard and acid test here.

          Like

Comments are closed.