Wednesday, March 01, 2006

9/11 - What Really Happened?

One of America's greatest tragedies occurred on September 11, 2001. The details of what really happened can be interpreted in different ways. This article looks at the various ways people view this event, but draws no conclusions. What do you believe?     Read more....
(Article opens new window.)

Categories: 9-11, Conspiracy, Terrorism.

17 Comments:

At 10:00 PM, Blogger jacobin said...

it doesn't take much more than a couple of brain cells to figure out that two 110 story steel framed buildings just don't collapse at the speed of air resistance, because of jet fuel, that was mostly burnt up on impact and the remaining was spread over maybe a few floors, what the fuel was really acid that ate up every steel beam all the way down to the ground in just one hour?and what about building 7?never hit by a plane and it also collapse that day just like a controlled demolition

 
At 10:35 PM, Blogger Beau said...

I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, and I would probably take the populist view of what was behind 9/11, but I still harbor suspicions that the Saudi government, or powerful individuals in that government may have secretly backed Bin Laden for political reasons that may have more to do with oil than ideology.

 
At 10:36 AM, Blogger Stephen Eli Harris said...

I found a great video that's called "Loose Change" yesterday and posted about it on my blog last night. It's something I believe should be watched by everyone because it's they've presented their theory in a way that's very hard to refute.

Please, check it out and pass it on.
http://eliharris.blogspot.com/2006/03/this-must-be-watched.html

Stephen

 
At 4:51 PM, Blogger Brad said...

Darn you, Stephen! I was just about to comment about the same video.

I was VERY suspicious about the idea of a conspiracy surrounding the events, I thought it more likely the administration was just incompetent. But when I saw the video, ESPECIALLY the stuff about the Pentagon, my opinion has certainly begun to shift.

 
At 11:19 PM, Blogger Wally Banners said...

lmao plz the morons in DC couldnt dream of this let alone pull it off.

 
At 8:54 AM, Anonymous Jake Porter said...

Wally,

Interested in putting out disinformation?

http://www.matriots.com/bh/25.html

The government has brainwashed the people, there is no way WTC 7 could have collapsed due to fire. Prof. Steven Jones agrees with me.

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

 
At 10:28 AM, Blogger Stephen Eli Harris said...

Yeah Brad, there wasn't a thought in my mind that there may be a conspiracy until coming accross that video. Now, it's hard for me to not believe the American Gov't inflicted the wound themselves.

Stephen

 
At 5:17 AM, Blogger Tara said...

Myself and my partner have seen this video before, and it raised a LOT of questions. It's hard to know what to think about it all, but I do have to agree that the towers couldn't have collapsed by themselves the way they did after the planes hit.

Something struck me as rather fishy at the time once the shock wore off a little, but now, I KNOW somethings not right.

I found my way here via Blogazoo.

 
At 4:56 PM, Blogger Jenn of the Jungle said...

Geez....Here, let me make it really simple for you.

1) Planes were highjacked.
2) Said planes were flown at very high speeds into buildings, and even a field.
3) The combination of jet fuel, structural damage, and the top 10+ floors collapsing from the damage brough the buildings down pancake style. Steel+office furniture+people+paper,etc=Lot's of weight.
4) There were no explosives, please see the Naudet Bro's. video, this shows that clearly.From inside the building.
5) I had two friends who made it out that day...I repeat, no explosives.
5) You can clearly see from every untouched video you watch, that the buildings failed at the higher levels and commenced pancaking.

See, how easy was that?

 
At 5:55 PM, Blogger jacobin said...

hey jenn

how do you explain building 7
a 48 story steel framed building which collapse in a few to the ground on it's own footing that same day, just like a controlled demolition

 
At 1:10 PM, Blogger Jenn of the Jungle said...

Simple, the southeast side I believe was horribly structurally damaged, pair that with fires that were not fought, more structural damage when the towers came down, a wha-la....down comes # 7.

Easy peasy.

 
At 2:56 PM, Blogger writer said...

that picture still gives me chills.

 
At 8:15 PM, Blogger jacobin said...

jenn

the southeast side I believe was horribly structurally damaged

you got a site i can visit with such evidence?

and if the damage was only on the southeast side

why would silverstein say we decided to "pull" the building on pbs

a wha-la....down comes your theory

 
At 4:07 PM, Blogger Jenn of the Jungle said...

Sorry Jacobin, it's not a theory. It's fact, fro mthe horses mouth. Google "firefighters @ wtc" and "popular mechanics wtc 911". Those are a mere two that debunk the bunk.

The pull it statement meant pull out, and pull down. Not blow it up.

If you even bothered to look at something besides the lie filled fantasy film "Loose Change", you would find all kinds of evidence that point to the fact that 9/11 is and was exactly as it seemed.

 
At 7:40 AM, Anonymous Athene said...

I commend you, first off, for asking a question MOST bloggers seem to be afraid to ask.... for the very reason Beau eluded to. These days, if you ask the question, what really happened, you're called a CONSPIRACY theorist, a Michael Moore reject and a crackpot, or all of the above. I also find it strange that when Charlie Sheen was caught being in Heidi Fleiss' book, it's all the news could talk about. Now that he's asking this VERY question and you can BARELY find anyone or any place reporting on it. I also find it odd that the official story is that the heat was so great after the crashes that it melted the steel girders. Strange that a few minutes later, there was a blonde woman standing in the hole. tragic actually, because we all know her fate. Anyways, I'm happy someone is asking the question. I sure do, DAILY.

 
At 7:50 PM, Blogger jacobin said...

hey jenn , so much for conspiracy "theory" it's more like fact

google "northwoods project" and tell me agents inside government aren't capable of such deadly shemes



Paul Craig Roberts a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration -->believes 9/11 was an inside job

Former Chief Economist under President Bush, Morgan Reynolds-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

U.S. Senator Mark Dayton-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

Renowned Theologian Prof. David Ray Griffin-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

Head of Advanced Space Programs, Dept. of Defense, Robert Bowman-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

UK Minister of Environment (1997 - 2003), Michael Meacher-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

Assistant Secretary of Housing For Pres. Bush, Catherine Austin Fitts-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

9/11 statement signed by 100 prominent Americans, 40 9/11 family members-->believes 9/11 was an inside job


Sandra Day O'Connor, a Republican-appointed judge who retired last month after 24 years on the supreme court, has said the US is in danger of edging towards dictatorship

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1729396,00.html



Andreas Von Bulow, Former German Secretary Of Defense-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

The Eagles,Don Henley has a new solo album, titled "Inside Job" the song referres to a 9/11 government inside job



Ray McGovern, a 27-year analyst for the CIA-->believes 9/11 was an inside job

 
At 4:24 PM, Blogger me said...

If you haven't seen them yet, check out these sites - definitely makes me question what happened at the Pentagon especially.

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm#Main

 

Post a Comment

<< Home