The 9/11 Truth Movement's Dangers

Nation: Dishonest Government Leads To Cynical Theorists

(The Nation)  This column was written by Christopher Hayes

---

According to a July poll conducted by Scripps News Service, one-third of Americans think the government either carried out the 9/11 attacks or intentionally allowed them to happen in order to provide a pretext for war in the Middle East. This is at once alarming and unsurprising. Alarming, because if tens of millions of Americans really believe their government was complicit in the murder of 3,000 of their fellow citizens, they seem remarkably sanguine about this fact. By and large, life continues as before, even though tens of millions of people apparently believe they are being governed by mass murderers. Unsurprising, because the government these Americans suspect of complicity in 9/11 has acquired a justified reputation for deception: weapons of mass destruction, secret prisons, illegal wiretapping. What else are they hiding?

This pattern of deception has not only fed diffuse public cynicism but has provided an opening for alternate theories of 9/11 to flourish. As these theories — propounded by the so-called 9/11 Truth Movement — seep toward the edges of the mainstream, they have raised the specter of the return (if it ever left) of what Richard Hofstadter famously described as "the paranoid style in American politics." But the real danger posed by the Truth Movement isn't paranoia. Rather, the danger is that it will discredit and deform the salutary skepticism Americans increasingly show toward their leaders.

The Truth Movement's recent growth can be largely attributed to the Internet-distributed documentary "Loose Change." A low-budget film produced by two 20-somethings that purports to debunk the official story of 9/11, it's been viewed over the Internet millions of times. Complementing "Loose Change" are the more highbrow offerings of a handful of writers and scholars, many of whom are associated with Scholars for 9/11 Truth. Two of these academics, retired theologian David Ray Griffin and retired Brigham Young University physics professor Steven Jones, have written books and articles that serve as the movement's canon. Videos of their lectures circulate among the burgeoning portions of the Internet devoted to the cause of the "truthers." A variety of groups have chapters across the country and organize conferences that draw hundreds. In the last election cycle, the website www.911truth.org even produced a questionnaire with pointed inquiries for candidates, just like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or the Sierra Club. The Truth Movement's relationship to the truth may be tenuous, but that it is a movement is no longer in doubt.

Truth activists often maintain they are simply "raising questions," and as such tend to focus with dogged persistence on physical minutiae: the lampposts near the Pentagon that should have been knocked down by Flight 77, the altitude in Pennsylvania at which cellphones on Flight 93 should have stopped working, the temperature at which jet fuel burns and at which steel melts. They then use these perceived inconsistencies to argue that the central events of 9/11 — the plane hitting the Pentagon, the towers collapsing — were not what they appeared to be. So: The eyewitness accounts of those who heard explosions in the World Trade Center, combined with the facts that jet fuel burns at 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit and steel melts at 2,500, shows that the towers were brought down by controlled explosions from inside the buildings, not by the planes crashing into them.

If the official story is wrong, then what did happen? As you might expect, there's quite a bit of dissension on this point. Like any movement, the Truth Movement is beset by internecine fights between different factions: those who subscribe to what are termed LIHOP theories (that the government "let it happen on purpose") and the more radical MIHOP ("made it happen on purpose") contingent. Even within these groups, there are divisions: Some believe the WTC was detonated with explosives after the planes hit and some don't even think there were any planes.

[sharncedar]

9/11 is synergistically connected to the aims and goals of non-democratic elements within our corporate/fascist government. Thus, to some people it is a simpler viewpoint to say that corporate/fascist state actually did the 9/11 act itself.

I don't think the distinction matters much. Those who used the incident to kill more Americans and seize our freedoms from us are as guilty as if they did it themselves, so what is the point in arguing whether they actually pulled the trigger on the attack.

The law theory is that of "accessory after the fact" which gets you the same conviction. This government is at leat an "accessory after the fact" of the 9/11 murders, for example by letting Bin Laden's family out of the country. That is a known fact, how do you dispute it, other than with Bush-stlye false rhetoric.

[sharncedar]

"By and large, life continues as before, even though tens of millions of people apparently believe they are being governed by mass murderers"

What do you propose we do? We are trying to make our mortgage payments and keep our jobs so we'll have health care, we are out here 1 foot in the middle class and 1 foot in the grave. What do you expect people to do, of course everyone I know is extremely angry and cynical, with no respect for leadership at any level, but we have real fear and real consequences held over our heads.

[sandycat2]

This is not a shock to me. Most of these Americans who beleive this stupid conspiracy theory are democrats and so-called liberals. I have talked to many of them. But the attitude of the Deocratic party toward and their hatred of Bush has fostered this belief and allowed it to grow. I say again what I have said for a long time now. Democrats don't know who are enemy is. They think we are the enemy. God help us now that democrats are in power. We will be at the mercy of our enemies.

[stezzer]

As a Brit I'm stunned one-third of Americans believe this rubbish.

9/11 was perpetrated by brainwashed Islamic terrorists. And making up silly conspiracy theories lets them off the hook.

The nutters who planned 9/11 must be thrilled people are blaming the American government.

[swingalong]

How can one say that most of these idiots are this party or that? Have you done a survey? No, you haven't. It's pretty silly to blame such lack of toughmindedness on the liberals and Democrats. I can argue the opposite easily enough. Remember, we didn't believe in WMMs and all the silly conspiracy nonsense Bush was able to shovel-feed to the conservative, yellow ribbon suckers. Some of the biggest conspiracy theorists I know are right wing nuts. Liberals aren't impressed when Bush tries to scare us with idiotic talk about human/animal clones, either. (Shiver, shiver, grab my wrist!). What was he talking about? Baaa! Oops! It is Senator Hatch (Senator Male Enhancement) who has helped to bring quack herbal potions to the mainstream suckers of all political persuasions. Actually, I don't believe the preposterous 911 conspiracy fad is really a liberal/conservative thing. I've noticed that both have the tendency to believe in herbal remedies, UFOs, and other silliness. For many other things that count, however, I think liberals are clearly more toughminded. If you mouthe a clichi like "Freedom isn't Free," you can COUNT on conservatives mindlessly to fall into step in their very classic sheeplike mannor. No thinking, just tears in their eyes and flags waving and yaller ribbons plastered everywhere. Gosh, war is fun! This is how Bush was able to ruin the country's reputation forever, gut the treasury, empower the enemy, and get everyone killed in Iraq for nothing.

[jhindson1]

Truthiness is at at work here. . . . . people believing with their gut rather than the facts.

It is not that steel melts at 2500 degress, it is that steel loses its strength way before it melts. That, combined with broken beams and finally upper floor collapse on the severly weakened structure brought down the towers.

Bush is the master of truthiness.

[egresor]

to believe that there are no valid questions on the administration's position on the occurences of 9-11 is to be awake with ones eyes closed and ears plugged.

is it any wonder that the public doesn't believe what is being released as the facts? in the past there were plans to kill american citizens to justify invading cuba.... and weren't there occurences of exposing american citizens to deadly (or sickening) bacteria and radiation unbeknownst to them? what about the syphilis studies on blacks? never question your leaders because they wouldn't do such things.

how does molten steel remain in the lower levels of the towers for weeks after-- when nothing in the fire was capable of producing the sorts of temperatures required to cause steel to become molten.

why the secrecy? why doesn't the pentagon release clear pictures of the airplane collision? family victim concerns? they relased a short section that showed nothing without consulting them. evidence for the Moussaoui trial was used, but that's over. the 9-11 commission failed to question much of anything, but accepted what they were delivered to them. is it any wonder people question?

do some in depth research and see if you don't find valid questions.

[egresor]

to jhindson1
its correct that steel gets weakened and that it could contribute to the collapse, but there are also other considerations.

there was nothing present capable of producing the temperatures required to cause steel to become molten. nothing! not the jet fuel nor any component of the structure in combination with it.

credible eyewitness evidence and actual photographs showed the evidence of steel being raised to high enough temperatures to become molten. that was not possible with the jet fuels nor with any combination of fuels available to the fire. and that by a substancial ammount.

it isn't that alone which causes one to pause and question. there are many others.

[sandycat2]

egressor, don't you beleive what the people who witnessed the event and lived through it. How about the people who died on the plane. Some talked by cell phone to loved ones up until the crash that claimed their lives. Is not this alone enough to tell you what happened? The plane crashing into the Pentagon was only caught on tape by a security camera and was released to the public. I saw it. It doesn't look like much because it's security film. Security film always doesn't look like much. The US has real enemies in Islamic extemists who want to kill us. Something is very wrong with your thinking.

[rafterman1]

I love how you righties bring up our "hatred of Bush" like we just decided to hate some otherwise normally likable guy for no reason. Or my personal favorite, we hate Bush because he's religious or we hate Bush for "who he is" - as if it is unwarranted hated.

George Bush has shown great incompetence in dealing with disasters like 9-11 and Katrina. He started a war on falsified evidence, killing 3000 of our kids and countless Iraqis. His policies have driven more people to terrorism and extremism than ever before, making us much less safe than we ever were. He used 9-11 as an excuse to scare the American people into taking away our liberties. He contnues to give tax breaks to corporations and the rich over the people who need it the most, the middle class. He refuses to recognize mistakes (or apparently, reality) as evidenced by his latest statements on how the Iraq commission proves he was right about Iraq. He has changed our surplus into a devastating deficit with unstoppable spending. He picked as his first veto a bill that would have helped sick people (stem cell research). He appointed several radical right wing judges and other people. He implied that Americans were traitors or terrorist sympathizers for simply disagreeing with his policies. He is also not intellectually curious and just plain lazy.

So, do I hate Bush? You bet I do. I hate anyone who hurts our country. He is the worst president ever and history will bear that out.

[rafterman1]

Don't you know, those passengers on the planes were in on the conspiracy. They were really committed to the lie :)

The problem with consipracy theories is, they are self-mutating. For instance, obviously, the planes crashed into the towers (we saw them) and the passengers told their loved ones what was happening (terrorists, etc). The conspiracy then shifts from "the government did it with cruise missiles" to "the government knew about it and let it happen". And if that idea can be disproven, they come up with a new theory. Basically, you cannot convince a conspiracy theorist of anything, no matter what proof you have to the opposite.

Sometimes weird stuff happens and you can't explain every iota of an incident. There isn't an event in history that has every question answered. There's always something unexplained. But that doesn't mean it's a great conspiracy. Steel failing at only 1500 degrees vs 2500 degrees might be unusual, but that just means something we can't fully explain happened, not that it's a plot.

[aeasus]

Dishonest Government Leads To Cynical Theorists

The title of the story says it all!!

[ecuadoriana]

yes, the planes really did crash into the wtc. yes, innocent people really spoke with their families right up till their deaths. and yes, the bushites had this planned from the beginning to justify their end- a "holy war" (bush's words) against the middle east. the people in the planes were "soft targets", the term used to describe civilians killed when missiles attack a city. accouple thousand disposible soft targets is worth it, to bush, if it gets him what he wants in the end.

what he should get in the "end" is a hard, swift kick from each family member left behind to mourn the loss of their dead- and that includes every iraqi woman who held a dead, mangled child or husband in her arms...

[aeasus]

Cut and pasted from ... http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=112&contentid=3961&page=2

Kevin Ryan who was responsible for the thermal testing of the WTC Steel when it was certified, the samples tested for the WTC were certified to withstand a temperature of 2,000 deg for 6 hours without failing their rated load characteristics. And that is without insulation.
The WTC beams were insulated.

South tower which fell first after burning for only 55 minutes, and at a point when the fires had greatly diminished.

[hpcharlie]

My Question to Many Americans: Do You Really Know What the "New World Order" is "actually all about?"...Do you know what being a "Neo-Con"...means? Do you know what the "Illumninati"...means?

I STRONGLY SUGGEST ANYONE..."WHO HAS NO CLUE" TO THE "ABOVE ITEMS"...."REALLY ...YOU NEED 2 GET A GRIP...AND UNDERSTAND...WHAT'S HAPPENING!..IF U ONLY "KNEW A ONE THIRD OF THE ABOVE"...IT'S "ENOUGH 2 MAKE ANYONE ...FIND A "NEW PLANET!" SERIOUSLY...IF YOU HAVE ANY IQ...YOU WILL BE COMPLETELY...DISMAYED!

Charlie C.
Dallas TX

[hpcharlie]

My Question to Many Americans: Do You Really Know What the "New World Order" is "actually all about?"...Do you know what being a "Neo-Con"...means? Do you know what the "Illumninati"...means?

I STRONGLY SUGGEST ANYONE..."WHO HAS NO CLUE" TO THE "ABOVE ITEMS"...."REALLY ...YOU NEED 2 GET A GRIP...AND UNDERSTAND...WHAT'S HAPPENING!..IF U ONLY "KNEW A ONE THIRD OF THE ABOVE"...IT'S "ENOUGH 2 MAKE ANYONE ...FIND A "NEW PLANET!" SERIOUSLY...IF YOU HAVE ANY IQ...YOU WILL BE COMPLETELY...DISMAYED!

Charlie C.
Dallas TX

[sandycat2]

Raftermann, thanks so much for letting your Bush hate get in the way of the US's safety. Sometimes American's need to put aside differences and think of our country. I am not crazy about a lot of things Bush has done, but I want to protect this country from further attacks. And I think the US is at risk from Americans just like you. So thanks again.

[iggyd-2009]

It is not about the temp at which steel melts, the problem is, is how molten steel got into the basements of all 3 buildings, it is how they fell, there was nothing wrong with the structure below the impact zones of WTC 1&2 to allow for a straight down, at the most a toppling effect should have happened, especially #7. It is also about how fast they fell and it is that those steel and concrete buildings instantaneously turned to a fine powder that was measured in the microns to settle into the lungs of the workers and then for the government to lie to the entire city about the dangers which is still bringing death to the rescuers.

As SharnCedar stated, what are we to do? When Americans (Padilla) and Canadians (Arar) are taken into custody, one sent to Syria tortured for years and the other tortured for years and still has not been charged. Are we to believe that similar could not or are not happening to others?

You call free thinkers, tin hat nut balls. Then blindly follow and believe all that is dealt to you by the very group that perpetrated the lies to begin with, most do not or will not read if their life depended on it, so that is why at one point more that 70% of the populous believed that there were WMD%u2019s and what is more crazy is some still do. They call us crazy, well I call them retarded, what else can explain a group of people that will give up the defining document that makes this country special %u201CThe Constitution%u201D for flag waving, nationalistic, fascism?

[iggyd-2009]

It is not about the temp at which steel melts, the problem is, is how molten steel got into the basements of all 3 buildings, it is how they fell, there was nothing wrong with the structure below the impact zones of WTC 1&2 to allow for a straight down, at the most a toppling effect should have happened, especially #7. It is also about how fast they fell and it is that those steel and concrete buildings instantaneously turned to a fine powder that was measured in the microns to settle into the lungs of the workers and then for the government to lie to the entire city about the dangers which is still bringing death to the rescuers.

As SharnCedar stated, what are we to do? When Americans (Padilla) and Canadians (Arar) are taken into custody, one sent to Syria tortured for years and the other tortured for years and still has not been charged. Are we to believe that similar could not or are not happening to others?

You call free thinkers, tin hat nut balls. Then blindly follow and believe all that is dealt to you by the very group that perpetrated the lies to begin with, most do not or will not read if their life depended on it, so that is why at one point more that 70% of the populous believed that there were WMD%u2019s and what is more crazy is some still do. They call us crazy, well I call them retarded, what else can explain a group of people that will give up the defining document that makes this country special %u201CThe Constitution%u201D for flag waving, nationalistic, fascism?

[aeasus]

But more important than the issue of the likelihood of the steel failure, is the FACT (not conjecture) that ALL THREE buildings collapsed into their own footprint at FREEFALL SPEED (i.e. the unimpeded acceleration of gravity).

Don't forget building WTC7,total collapse,never hit by a plane.

[aeasus]

sandycat2,


Sometimes American's need to put aside differences and think of our country.
.............

Practice what you preach. Don't assume hpcharlie's point of view is entirely fictitious without conducting your own investigation. There may besome truth! His intentions may be very patriotic!

[sandycat2]

Why would the WTC buildings just topple. The buildings gave way at the point of the impacrt of the airplanes. That's where the damage and the immense heat was. The weight of the building above that point crashed downward at the weak point as gravity began to pull it down. And the floors just pancaked down onto one another, crushing everything in its path. The debris area was immense. Didn't you see the size of the hole after the area was cleaned up. This event was so catistrophic than we saw it on tape and many still can't comprehend the magnitude of what happened. The whole thing makes perfect sense to me. And please remember that the 1st bombing of the TWC was an actual bomb which the terrorists believeed would bring down the WTC and it didn't do it. Is it any wonder they used planes as bombs the next time they attacked. I am sick of having this discussion. I'm done talking about it. Like the one person said here, conspiracy theorists will see a conspiracy theory no matter what anyone says or what we see happened.

[aeasus]

andycat2 wrote,

Why would the WTC buildings just topple
...........
They didn't topple,they collapsed at freefall speed.

[nothappyatall]

IggyD excellent posts!

These tower collapses had WAY too many anomalies and way too many odd things recorded by witnesses and more to say they collapsed solely as a result of those planes and some burning fuel- most of which in the case of one of the towers- I believe it was the second plane- was burning in a huge fireball OUTSIDE the building.

Sandycat, there is NO way we can protect against another attack, they already have people HERE laying in wait, there is no way we can protect every building every bridge and tunnel, every power plant, every water supply, every oil refinery, church, subway platform and every gathering of crowds against determined nuts bent on revenge and suicide.

2-4 suicide bombers walking up the Brooklyn Bridge's public pedestrian path at rush hour and standing next to the 2 main support cables at the top by the path, or all 4 if two guys climb out a bit- setting off their explosives at the same time WOULD bring the entire bridge down along with everyone on it, cars and subway train.

it would cost a billion dollars to replace the bridge and disrupt the city transportation for ten years

All it would take is 2-4 nuts on each Manhattan bridge walking up the PUBLIC walkways which run by the main cables, and they could do a severe number on the entire city. They had no shortage of nuts on 9/11, think they can't find 20 guys to take out 5 bridges? It would happen and be over in minutes- before anyone could even respond.

[nothappyatall]

We simply cannot keep up indefinite, expensive "security" forever everywhere, there WILL BE another 9/11 without any doubt so it's not a question of "if" but when and where and nothing Bush or the Govt does will prevent it, but their actions and the rest have made it much more LIKELY now.

[egresor]

to sandycat2

you are correct that the video released on the pentagon was only from a security camera.

even if you were a complete outsider....with no knowledge of what the security makeup of the pentagon is---wouldn't you find it hard to believe that the pentagon (which is one of the most secure/protected buildings in the world) would not have the most sophisticated security monitoring systems available? not only video, but others? isn't it even more protected than the white house?

wouldn't they have the very best high speed video cameras available that could zoom in to very high detail anywhere surrounding it?

where did that video that was released come from? what was the location of that security camera? why did they confiscate the videos from the gas station across from it? why has no other video been released?

read David Ray Griffin's books for some most interesting questions. at first I too believed that it was straight forward, but genuine questioning and research has changed my opinion on that completely. Brezinski's 'new pearl harbor' being the blueprint for bush and cheny's extremist ideologic reality.

[emhawks]

I believe the 911 investigation should be re-opened; there are too many unanswered questions. For the record, my political party is Independent. I'm not a "conspiracy theory person", but I am an American who is very concerned about what has happened in the past (6)yrs. during the Bush adm. & how it will effect our country in the future.
I believe Bush & Cheney & other individuals within the Bush adm., were involved in the events leading up to 911. Our government isn't above using, misleading or abusing the American people if the individuals currently in office see personal gain to be had. FDR knew Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked & allowed it to happen in order to raise American outrage so we would be willing to enter WWII. The Vietnam War (which never should have happened) was allowed to continue on for years longer than it should have, because various defense contractors & sub-contractors were making so much money. Consider the continuing mystery surrounding the assasination of JFK & the Warren Commission Report.
Check out the following:
(1) Project for the New American Century(PNAC)
(2) The Carlyle Group
(3) Saudi Binladen Group(SBG)
(4) History of the Bush family involvement with the bin Laden family.
(5) The book, "Crossing the Rubicon" by Michael C. Ruppert.
(6) Scholars for 911 Truth (read the list of members).

[AgentGGG]

While much of the 9/11 conspiracy is unsupported speculation, the collapse of WTC 1, 2 and 7 remains suspect.

It appears that NIST did not research the issue of the collapse mechanism, but relied on the conclusions of Dr. Zdenek Bazant. But, very important questions remain despite the NIST explanation, for example, assymetry and duration of the collapse.

I implore you to recognize that the heart of the matter has been sidestepped by Dr. Bazant and NIST! And WTC 7 is even more suspect!

[AgentGGG]

Dr. Bazant does not appear address assymetry of the collapse. Even though the structural damage was asymmetrical, WTC 1 and 2 collapsed straight downwards, requiring all net forces and moments, regardless of temperature or damage, to be aligned downwards. There does not appear to be any logical support for this.

Secondly, the duration of the collapse has supposedly been resolved by Dr. Bazant and NIST. However, Dr. Bazant states that the energy of the collapse was self-sustaining and thus unstoppable once it began. But he assumes a fracture failure mechanism on each floor without plasticity. He then confirms the collapse times under these assumptions. This appears to be an entirely circular argument. See Bazant p. 20, item 2.

Even if there was enough energy to collapse each story successively, is 8.4x the amount of energy enough snap all supports instantaneously? If not, then there must have been some amount of plastic deformation, and thus a longer time than freefall required for collapse. But freefall was observed.

This is what Dr. Judy Wood compellingly suggests. In fact, a fracture of each story can only be logically assumed in the case of demolition. The failure should be modeled and analyzed, for it will provide the true answers everyone is looking for.

[sandycat2]

There is always odd things things happening in every event. The attacks of 9/11 were catestrphoic events that are no means usual, therefore you have no way of judging them except from your own stupid imaginations. I know the US will be attacked again. There will be another 9/11 and probaly worse. Who will Bush haters blame when it happens after Bush is out of office?

[AgentGGG]

The Popular Mechanics article does not sufficiently explain the freefall collapse of WTC 1 and 2. It is not enough that the support beams failed, but that they all snapped instantaneously on all floors (even at initiation) for the observed collapse to be explained. Some sandwiching of the upper stories is also inconsistent with heat weakening of steel, which makes it more plastic, not brittle. The fundamental question of collapse is being sidestepped instead of scientifically addressed. Try to get government funding to model the WTC collapse!!!

[AgentGGG]

One final statement, during the run-up to the war, those voices who warned of the chaos and instability, bloodshed and destruction, and the intractibility of the US situation, were scoffed at and ridiculed.

But six years hence, a majority of Americans wishes they had heeded those calls for restraint and carefulness.

Think about that when you discount voices of reason and stop asking questions and disregard scientific inquiry.

[emhawks]

An interesting footnote:
Check out the case against Rumsfeld, Gonzales & others filed in Germany on Nov. 14, 2006 to have them prosecuted for war crimes, & how it's interwoven with the Military Comissions Act of 2006. For more info. on this, go to the Center for Constitutional Rights.

[sandycat2]

agent, why waste our taxpayers money on this dunb stuff. Why don't you spend your money on it instead. It is immpossible to duplicate what happened to the WTC on 9/11. We don't have any buildings exactly like these monsters and we cannot diplicate the aircraft crashing into them with the equivalant amount of jet fuel. So I would rather spend taxpayer's dollars on things that matter.

[sandycat2]

agent you can figure 8.4 X anything you want, but it is all guess work. If you want to prove a theory than you have to have evidence to prove what you say. Otherwise it is just a conspiracy thoery. And you can theorize until the cows come home and without evidence to prove what you are saying, it remains just another conspiracy theory.

[darkfyreaol]

There may have been someone or a group of people in the chain of command that dropped the ball. Perhaps they were negligent in obtaining the information of the attacks, or in reporting it.

That much is obvious - It would not have happened otherwise.

As to the impact of the Pentagon, I've seen the camera clips of the so-called 'plane' that struck the building... I refuse to believe it was a 747, though it could have been a much smaller private jet...Or as theorists say, a missile. Which is entirely possible, provided an Air Force missile missed its intended target..(or maybe a pilot got trigger happy?)..

Back to the WTC.. Do your research. Aviation fuel doesn't burn hot enough to liquify the steel girders used in constructing the towers (if it did, heck, the planes themselves would melt on takeoff!).

Certain incendiaries, though, such as thermite or white phosphorous, do.

[sandycat2]

You are calling witnesses who saw the plane crash into the Pentegon, liars. It wasn't like nobody wasn't at the pentegon and didn't see the plane. What kind of mind wants to believe their own theorys and call witnesses liars? I don't know what temp jet fuel burns at, but the jets crashing into the buildings exploded on impact. This was no controlled burn. Other things burned besides jet fuel. You don't know what the temp was in those buildings, you are just supposeing. Like I said, you have no evidence to prove what you are saying. Therefor what you are saying is just a conpiracy theory.

[feelfree1]

For a relatively clear presentation about some of the technical issues surrounding the WTC collapses, I would recommend watching the "Improbable Collapse" 9/11 documentary. Part one here:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUMKP4WaMgM&mode=related&search=

The real meat of the analysis starts to appear in part two.

[feelfree1]

Many Western journalists seem fixated on the 'Loose Change' movies, as if they encapsulate the ultimate challenge to the official 9/11 explanation. While these movies raise several interesting points, I found the 'Loose Change' films to be a little sloppy.

For a look at some of the general controversey surrounding the official 9/11 story, I suggest watching a movie called:

9/11 Press For Truth

Watch it here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5589099104255077250

Again, for some good analysis specifically addressing the building collapses, here is a shorter URL:

'Improbable Collapse' 9/11 WTC Part 1

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUMKP4WaMgM

[feelfree1]

According to a CBS/New York Times Poll, taken just in October of 2006, only 12% of Americans surveyed believed that the Bush regime is telling the truth about the events on 9/11/01.

This survey indicates that 81% of Americans think that Bush regime officials are either "hiding something" or "mostly Lying" about the events of 9/11.

www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13469

[feelfree1]

emhawks,

Re: "...but I am an American who is very concerned about what has happened in the past (6)yrs. during the Bush adm. & how it will effect our country in the future."

You are definitely not alone!

Good comment.

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to World War II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. To a hypothetical, I can answer, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front. Now those traitors have occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq; the President hasn%u2019t been impeached. Why?...I'm waiting.

[feelfree1]

sandycat2,

Have you seen this film?

'Improbable Collapse' 9/11 WTC Part 1

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUMKP4WaMgM

[feelfree1]

"Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public"

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300_pf.html

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to World War II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. To a hypothetical, I can answer, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed and maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country that can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front. Now those traitors have occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq; the President hasn%u2019t been impeached. Why?...I'm waiting.

[logic12]

Like many who posted here, for almost five years I dismissed 9/11 "conspiracy theories" as dreams of overactive fools. Then I chanced to see a video of the 47-floor WTC7 (not the twin towers) on that day as it went straight down into its own footprint at freefall speed - just like a demolition - for no apparent reason (no planes hit it, had no major fires, etc.). I found that "anomaly" was just the tip of the iceberg! Surprisingly, the more one looks, the less things resemble the "official story" at all.
But don't take my word for it. And DON'T let a lazy patriotism get the best of you %u2013 be a real patriot and find out the truth.
I encourage anyone who cares about their world to look closely into the evidence. Using your own sense of logic, see for yourself whether the official story holds water, or whether we have been carrying the water for someone all this time. I think you will find that, despite the obfuscations by the conflicted Popular Mechanics editors, science is clearly more thoroughly done and solidly on the side of the "Truthers". (For instance, I have worked in metallurgy, and let me assure you: without the intense, instantaneous heat of thermate explosives, it would be well nigh impossible to explain the "little anomaly" of molten steel beneath the towers.) Find out for yourself.
If on the other hand you are simply afraid to see the truth that is another issue.
The question then becomes, do we care enough about our country to set it right?

[emhawks]

sandycat2: The questions & issues you've raised are why I believe the 911 investigation needs to be re-opened; too many unanswered questions, too many issues not addressed, too many "loose ends".
Regarding Scholars for 911 Truth: I said in an earlier post to check out the list of members. Many of the members of this organization are former military/intelligence people; some have been members of the Bush adm.
Not everyone who believes the Bush adm. was involved in 911 is a fool or a "conspiracy nut". Many are ordinary, concerned Americans who believe that the only way the truth about 911 will ever be known, is to re-open the investigation.

[sandycat2]

I am really sorry for you people. From what I have read and seen about the 9/11 attacks, I beleive that Islamic extremists attacked us on 9/11. Neither the US or the Jews had anything to do with 9/11. And when the US gets attacked again by these awful and murderous people, I will hold each and every one of you accountable.

[feelfree1]

Logic12,

Good points. Have you seen these?

'Improbable Collapse' 9/11 WTC Part 1

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUMKP4WaMgM

'9/11 Press For Truth'

http://video.google.com/videopl
ay?docid=5589099104255077250

[winstonkirk]

The left, self described, gatekeepers have spoken so the American public should just go back to sleep. Everything is fine, we only need to worry about those confused, paranoid, wrongheaded time wasters who think crazy thoughts about the nature of what our national (hard to call it federal now) government has become.

This is a silly article which was forced to be written as a result of millions of people looking at the evidence themselves, not because wearing tin foil hats is a contagious disease. The Truth movement (its not "so called" because the bulk of the families and first responders are with us asking the same questions and coming to the same conclusions) is gaining people at an exponential rate. As the corporate media declines, just look at their numbers, we will be the mainstream.

When the next big attack comes, look at the private intelligence groups along with rouge elements in our national government. They are the real terrorists. For now, start to do some research, go to Google Video and watch:
9/11 Press For Truth
Terror Storm
Improbable Collapse
America: From Freedom to Fascism (not on 9/11 but even more important topics)
9/11 Mysteries

Then go through the official accounts. Think for yourself and compare. Do the research. Attack every statement and claim and see which account holds up.

If you are in New England and are convinced before the 16th, join the thousands who are gathering for the new Boston Tea Party.