75 top professors and leading scientists claim 9/11 was ‘inside job’



(Daily Mail Reports) – The 9/11 terrorist attack on America which left almost 3,000 people dead was an “inside job”, according to a group of leading academics.

Around 75 top professors and leading scientists believe the attacks were puppeteered by war mongers in the White House to justify the invasion and the occupation of oil-rich Arab countries.

leading scientists say the facts of their investigations cannot be ignored and say they have evidence that points to one of the biggest conspiracies ever perpetrated.

Professor Steven Jones, who lectures in physics at the Brigham Young University in Utah, says theofficial version of events is the biggest and most evil cover up in history.

He has joined the 9/11 Scholars for Truth whose membership includes up to 75 leading scientists and experts from universities across the US.

Prof Jones said:  We don’t believe that 19 hijackers and a few others in a cave in Afghanistan pulled this off acting alone.

“We challenge this official conspiracy theory and, by God, we’re going to get to the bottom of this.”

In essays and journals, the scientists are giving credence to many of the conspiracy theories that have circulated on the internet in the past five years.

They believe a group of US neo-conservatives called the Project for a New American Century, set on US world dominance, orchestrated the 9/11 attacks as an excuse to hit Iraq, Afghanistan and later Iran.

The group says scientific evidence over the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon is conclusive proof.

Professor Jones said it was impossible for the twin towers to have collapsed in the way they did from the collision of two aeroplanes.

He maintains jet fuel does not burn at temperatures high enough to melt steel beams and claims horizontal puffs of smoke seen during the collapse of the towers are indicative of controlled explosions used to bring down the towers.

The group also maintains World Trade Centre 7 – a neighbouring building which caught fire and collapsed later in the day – was only partially damaged but had to be destroyed because it housed a clandestine CIA station.

Professor James Fetzer, 65, a retired philosopher of science at the University of Minnesota, said: “The evidence is so overwhelming, but most Americans don’t have time to take a look at this.”

The 9/11 Commission dismissed the numerous conspiracy theories after its exhaustive investigation into the terror attacks.

Subsequent examinations of the towers’ structure have sought to prove they were significantly weakened by the impact which tore off fire retardant materials and led the steel beams bending under heat and then collapsing.

Christopher Pyle, professor of constitutional law at Mt Holyoake College in Massachusetts, has dismissed the academic group.

He said: “To plant bombs in three buildings with enough bomb materials and wiring? It’s too huge a project and would require far too many people to keep it a secret afterwards.

“After every major crisis, like the assassinations of JFK or Martin Luther King, we’ve had conspiracy theorists who come up with plausible scenarios for gullible people. It’s a waste of time.”

But University of Wisconsin assistant professor, Kevin Barrett, said experts are unwilling to believe theories which don’t fit into their belief systems.

He said: “People will disregard evidence it if causes their faith to be shattered. I think we were all shocked. And then, when the voice of authority told us what happened, we just believed it.”

MUST SEE Professor Steven Jones on the Controlled Demolition Of WTC Demolition

Sharh al-Sunna


The False Attribution of Sharh al-Sunna to the HanbaliOutlaw Al-Barbahari

Among the false attributions being promoted in our time is the book entitled:

“Sharh al-Sunna”

Chainlessly attributed by Ibn Abi Ya`la (d. 526) in his Tabaqat al-Hanabila to the Hanbali outlaw and anthropomorphist Abu Muhammad al-Barbahari (253-329), which in reality reaches us through a unique sixth-century Zahiriyya manuscript with anunambiguous, explicit chain back to the ultra-Hanbali Sufi forgerGhulam al-Khalil (d. 275) as his own work – and thus catalogued byFuat Sezgin in his  “Tarikh al-Turath al-`Arabi” – without any mention of al-Barbahari whatsoever.

This is acknowledged in all its numerous, mutually censorious prints from 1408H to 1426H

(three editions by Muhammad ibn Sa`id al-Qahtani, then three editions by Khalid al-Raddadi, then another edition by `Abd al-Rahman al-Jumayzi), each criticizing the previous although they all find excuses why authorship should be attributed to al-Barbahari – mostly on the basis of Ibn Abi Ya`la’s unsourced claim and his imitators the later Hanbalis


Ibn Taymiyya,

Ibn `Abd al-Hadi,

Ibn Muflih,

Ibn `Imad and al-Dhahabi.

One editor even claims that “al-Barbahari‘s biographers all mention he wrote a “Sharh al-Sunna” while none of Ghulam al-Khalil does.”

 In fact, Qawwam al-Sunna al-Taymi (d. 535) in “al-Hujja fi Bayan al- Mahajja wa-Sharh `Aqidat Ahl al-Sunna” (2:473-475) explicitly cites the latter in his list of

“those shaykhs of the Salaf and the Khalaf upon whom is the reliance on the chapters of religious doctrine, who are our leaders in practicing the Sunna and who have publicized their belief… and I shall mention a group of our Imams among the Salaf who have composed books in those meanings… among them, Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ghalib, known asGhulam al-Khalil the companion of Ahmad ibn Hanbal

– and he omits any mention of al-Barbahari despite the length of his list.

Note: The Hanbali Abu `Abd Allah Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ghalib al- Bahili nicknamed Ghulam al-Khalil was al-La’laka’i’s teacher and a major Baghdad Sufi who reputedly ate only beans.

When he died, the souks of Baghdad closed down, his bier was carried to al-Basra where he was buried and the Hanbalis built a dome over his grave; but he fabricated hadiths of his own admission,forging no less than four hundred (400) of them according to Abu Dawud who called him “Baghdad’s dajjal” and refused to pray over him as mentioned in the books of the Du`afa.


Sharh as-Sunnah By Imam al-Barbahari, English translation
[b#4425, 5d2, HB 2 Vols 818pp With Commentary By Salih Al-Fawzan, Dar Makkah Int, English: Abdus-Sam]

A Gift to the Reader in Annotation of
Sharh as-Sunnah : The Explanation of The Sunnah

By Imam Abu Muhammad al-Hasan bin Ali bin Khalaf al-Barbahari
With Commementary By Shaykh, Dr. Saalih bin-Fawzan bin Abdullah al-Fawzan (Member of the Council of Senior Scholars Saudi Arabia)
[2 Volumes 480 + 338 Pages]
Translator : Abdus-Sami Abdus salam
Revised By Abu Asma Abdul Hakim Harun
Final Review and Edited By Abu Nasir Ibrahim Abdur Rauf
Publisher: Dar Makkah International (2012)


This book is so important to the Wahhabiyyah “Salafis” that they have Audio & Written commentaries on it:

-Salih Al-Fawzan (audio)
-Omar Al-Harkan (audio)
-Ahmad Abdas Salam (audio)
-Omar bin Sa’ud (audio)
-Abdul Aziz Ar-Rajihi (audio)
-Fahd bin Sulayman (audio)
-Abdul Aziz Ar-Rayes (audio)
-Falah Isma’il Mndakar (audio)
-Ahmad An-Najmee (written – Irshad As-Sari commentary)
-Ali Al-Halabee (written commentary)
-Salih As-Suhaymee (audio)

Note: That the Imams of Ar-Rijal all call Ghulam Khalil a liar, fabricator!

Al-Hakim An-Naysaburi says of him:
روى عن جماعة من الثقات أحاديث موضوعة
“He narrarated fabricated hadith from a group of trustworthy transmitters”

Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar (ra) says of Ghulam Khalil the following (Lisan Al-Mizan):

قال ابن عدي سمعت أبا عبد الله النهاوندي يقول قلت لغلام خليل: ما هذه الرقائق التي تحدث بها؟ قال وضعناها لنرقق بها قلوب العامة
“Ibn Uday said: I heard Aba Abdallah An-Nahawandi say: I said to Ghulam Khalil ‘what are these heart softening hadiths that you are narrating?’ he replied: ‘we’ve fabricated them to soften the hearts of the laymen’.

Al-Hafidh also says:

قال أبو داود أخشى أن يكون دجال بغداد
وقال الدارقطني متروك
سمعت الشيخ أبا بكر بن إسحاق يقول: أحمد بن محمد بن غالب ممن لا أشك في كذبه
قال أبو داود قد عرض علي من حديثه فنظرت في أربعمائة حديث أسانيدها ومتونها كذب كلها

“Hafidh Abu Dawud said about Ghulam Khalil: ‘I suspect he is the Dajjal of Baghdad”
“Ad-Daraqutni said about him: ‘Matruk’ (meaning his hadith is not accepted)”
“I heard Abu Bakr bin Ishaq say: “Ahmad bin Mohammed bin Ghalib (
Ghulam Khalil) is a liar without any doubt”
“Abu Dawud said: ‘his hadith was shown to me, and I saw of them only 400, and ALL of their isnads and texts were lies”

The book Sharh As-Sunnah, which is considered a book of much value to the Salafis, was not authored by Barbahari, rather it was authored by a fabricator of Hadith named Ghulam Khalil.


(Edited by ADHM)


Up ↑