I want to start by saying I hope 9/11 is what we have been taught as an evil terrorist group planned and carried out the plan without any U.S involvement or cover-up, but I have heard and seen evidence that suggest other wise like when BBC was reporting on the matter and they report that Building 7 had in fact collapsed, but instead it was still standing in the background of the reporter and it didn't fall for another 20 minutes.
The defining event of the 9/11 disaster was the fall of the Twin Towers. But the hypothesis for how the two towers fell has absolutely no scientific supporting evidence. Don't believe me, look it up yourself. The NIST report dealt only with collapse initiation. There have been no valid models computer or scale presented that support the official story because the official story is impossible.
The controlled demolition hypothesis on the other hand has some evidence. e.g. rapid and symmetrical nature of the falls. Therefore the CD hypothesis is only scientific hypothesis available.
I watched a movie, "911" it was called I think. The most clear memory of it is how they measured the damages on the Pentagon. You see, the building had collapsed a little bit, but despite the claims that an airplane had landed onto it, there were no debris ont he media footages whatsoever. Moreover, you can see that the damaged site is too small for the alleged aircraft to have hit it. And that is where the facts end and probability comes.
Ever watched "V for Vendetta"? Here's a quote:
"I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent."
The meaning of this is that no government can take away people's freedoms on its own. But it can take them away if the people want it to! And that is what MIGHT have happened - CIA standing behind the attacks, the purpose is to enforce the PATRIOT Act, NDAA and more, to gain people's "YES" to the invasion in Afghanistan (for the drug fields) and later in Iraq (for the oil). But that, of course, is only a legend.
Out of the many reasons you can list to support the conspiracy, the most obvious would have to be the scientific evidence. Pools of molten steel was found at the 9/11 site. Steel melts at 2750 degrees F. This is a scientifically proven fact. Jet fuel burns at a maximum temperature of 1800 degrees F. Also a scientifcally proven fact. How 1800 degrees of burning jet fuel MELTED steel defy's the laws of science! Even with news stories, photos, and videos provided as evidence, the 9/11 commission did not make a single referrence to the molten steel. They acted as if it never existed!
If the Pentagon released all the video evidence they have and confiscated from the surrounding private cameras recordings of the plane flying into the pentagon wall then that would end the debate for me. But for some reason they won't and it like ten 12 years after the fact already.
Most people in the engineering department at my school do not believe the official story for 911. Even the profs don't. It's not even worthy of debate because of the physics. In a fair world, if the official story was brought into a court room, the defense attorney would be thrown in jail. We're talking high school level physics here. The twin towers could probably be debated, but building 7 is so clear and in your face, that if you still believe the official story, you either refuse to believe, or haven't looked at the evidence
If any jerkwater police department had been conducting the investigation, then buShco would be in jail right now. Unfortunately in this case, the investigators (FBI) were under the direct auspices of the criminals themselves. Bu$hco always had everything to gain from 9/11; and with the enron scandal about to hit the fan, they had everything to lose from not doing it. Thats a double motive.
And if you want the smoking gun, its on p63 of "rebuilding americas' defenses", a manifesto published by bu$hco before they took office; where they talk about a "new pearl harbour" being necessary to implement their perverted agenda.
In my opinion there is two different ways this went down.
A. The U.S. government (or powerful factions of it) were involved directly with the planning and execution of it.
B. The U.S. government (or powerful factions of it) were indirectly involved by knowing of the attack and doing nothing to stop it.
Any way you spin it 9/11 was instrumental for the U.S. to go to the middle east and start wars with countries in the name of weapons of mass destruction (which were never found) and still we remained. The whole situation is way too fishy.
A cigar comes in many shapes, some in a box and some in a plastic wrap and some come with out any packaging. I know this to be true because I have smoked cigars in my life before and seen cigars at the smoke shop and in movies with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Cigars are brown, light brown and even dark brown in color. When you put a flame to a cigar it catches fire. Cigars stay lit for a very long time. When inhaling cigars, the intense sensation is multiplied many times over. Cigars are much stronger than a cigarette. Cigars have a distinct smell and taste. There are small cigars and big cigars, expensive cigars and illegal cigars. These are the qualities that make a cigar. I know what a cigar is because of the cigars characteristics.
n. Pl. Con·spir·a·cies
1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
With the same logic I have investigated 9/11. From beginning to the end the official story of 9/11 most of what has been told to people is untrue. I could get into detail but I don't feel like I will convince anyone that way.
I can break up 9/11 into categories
Motive - (war with Iraq and the war on terror)
Deception - ( using planes and blaming it on Osama Bin Laden when most of the evidence points to a US, Israeli Mossad and Saudi operation)
Insurance Fraud - ( Larry Silverstein leased the towers months before knowing the buildings were damaged goods. He insured WTC towers with terrorism coverage which he was compensated for by the billions.
Improbabilities - ( Building 7 collapsing into it's own foot print with no air plane collision)
The topics I have touched here is just a scratch in the surface to how everything about 9/11's official story is false. From NORAD to a Boeing 767 airplane flying over 500 mph at sea level. The entire story is wrong. The part that gives 9/11 away is the multiple coincidences and improbabilities, it is so numerous that eventually you have to stop and say to yourself that this event is a conspiracy as a cigar is a cigar. I hope people look into 9/11. Don't just glance at it but read pages upon pages of 9/11 and you will see the layers of 9/11 start to unfold
On September 11th, Towers One and Two collapsed after suffering direct hits by airliners. Building 7 was neither hit by an airliner nor damaged severely by flying debris, but at 5:20 p.M. It collapsed in the exact same accordion style of the other two towers. The official explanation by FEMA investigators claimed that WTC 7 fell as a result of burning for 7 hours.
Several weeks after the events of 9/11, Larry Silverstein, the new owner of the WTC was interviewed on TV. At this time he openly acknowledged the decision to pull Building 7. This was a public statement in which the owner of the WTC agreed to the destruction of the building.
This decision was never explained and was never questioned by the Kean Commission. The conflicting report of the FEMA investigators was also never explained. Pulling a building requires weeks, if not months of preparation. Explosives have to be carefully and strategically placed and wired. How was it possible to pull a building without first preparing for its demolition?
Larry Silverstein invested $386 million in WTC 7. On 9/11, by his own admission, Larry Silverstein ordered the demolition of his building. In February of 2002, his company won a settlement of $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers. Do the math. No one investigated. This is a confession to the demolition of Building 7. Let me repeat that, THIS IS A CONFESSION!
Many people who say that the 9/11 conspiracy was an inside job by the government have no logical reason why the United States government would kill thousands of US citizens. Many conspiracy theorists say that the US government did this in order to declare war on Iraq to gain oil. This is completely illogical. First of all, if they were that desperate for money and oil, then why not chop down the trees and take the billions of dollars of oil underneath Alaska? Why spend Billions of dollars on war to get presumably less of a value worth of oil? In the end, the US wouldn't have gained anything. Why fight the Taliban when they aren't the ones that have the oil? They are terrorists. And the ONLY reason we were fighting them was to counter terrorism due to 9/11.
The NIST reports on WTC 1 & 2, and on WTC 7, give thorough accurate explanations. The reports are difficult for the average person to understand, but conspiracy theorists simply ignore them. To make a theory of any kind credible, all the evidence has to be faced head on. The conspiracy theorists just ignore anything that doesn't fit their ideas. The NIST reports used over 100 outside experts drawn from academia and private industry. Truthers need to start by explaining how a conspiracy got such a diverse group of experts to lie about the deaths of 3000 people. It's not plausible. After 12 years there is no positive evidence of a conspiracy being organized or carried out. There would have to a chain of command, documents of plans,materials purchased and shipped, and conspirators paid. Al Qaeda and the Mafia leave a huge trail of evidence, despite unlimited desires and methods for keeping secrets. 9/11 secrecy is not plausible.
One thing that I would love is for a conspiracy theorist to do is give a full explanation of what they think happened that day. They won't do this because they can't without sounding mentally challenged, so they instead focus on the official story and anything about it which they do not understand. They'll point to puffs of smoke coming out of the towers, or molten *metal* underneath as if it is our job to convince them of each and every detail or the conspiracy is validated. It is not, it's their job to explain how this proves conspiracy. Yet when they try they fall back on made up possible explanations with no supporting evidence, or more frequently, other evidence which contradicts the evidence they have so far presented. Their case is never coherent nor consistent with reality, but as long as each argument sounds good individually they will never worry about adding it all up and seeing what the picture they have drawn looks like. They can't because it would destroy their belief system. That is why the 9/11 truth movement has fallen back on the mantra of "we're just asking questions". In other words, they're afraid to admit to their own theory.
The big power players in the world wouldn't risk upsetting the applecart and casting the world back to the stone age by generating such contempt between faiths. That would decimate their advantage. The only logical explanation for fostering such malice is a perversion of religion. And if by some crazy chance there was some conspiracy (controlled demolition, what a laugh!) there was no way they'd carry it out so recklessly and/or carelessly that they'd leave behind a trail of evidence for internet nerds with too much time on their hands to find. Sorry. But. No.
The conspiracy theories are framed from minds of people that forget how bad our government is as doing almost everything. They almost ironically use theoretical science as if it should work in the real world when as anyone that has done any experiment there are always margins of error due to real world effects. There are more articles by reputable sources that explain how conspiracy theorists get it wrong than reputable sources that say there is a conspiracy. Also not to mention you can go on Muslim(even Al Quida) websites that the US has no power over and read or watch people admitting to the crimes and detailing how they planned it. The biggest issue these hypothetical situations have for truth is that the people pushing them, they are one sided, uneducated and want a world that makes sense.
Unlike conspiracy theory supporters, I read the NIST reports on the WTC 1 and 2 and the WTC 7 building collapse, and moreover I understand them. Half of the NIST investigators were from academia and industry around the world. It's not plausible that they were part of a conspiracy. I am an engineer, and I can tell you that the pseudo-engineers claiming conspiracy do not understand what they are talking about. One test for competence is the belief that if thermite melts steel, somehow it remains melted without adding heat. Sorry guys, the second law of thermodynamic is not just a good idea, it's the law. Many of the claimed "facts" of the conspiracy theory are just dead wrong. For example, airplane parts, seats, and bodies were found are the Pentagon site and there is testimony of first responders to that fact. If you start counting the numbers of people who would have to be in a conspiracy, packing buildings with explosives with anyone noticing, etc, you soon get into the many thousands. Yet no one has come forth with direct evidence after 13 years. The Mafia does not keep secrets nearly so well, and the Mafia is really good at enforcing silence. The whole 9/11 conspiracy theory is not plausible.
The September 11 conspiracy theories have all been disproved. By their nature, conspiracy theories are based upon large amounts of circumstantial evidence and they totally lack any substantive evidence. In general, people tend to be attracted to sensational stories of government intrigue and secrets. These conspiracy theories are no different from the ones that have always been around about every major news event.
All governments have corruption within them, this has always been and always will be. But, to say that the entire government is killing their own citizens and costing themselves money is just stupid. Conspiracy theorems are the most pathetic form of escapism, because people are depressed and thinks don't always go their way blame the government. Wake up, people died, more money was spent in rebuilding and the war, than was ever made.
No is my initial answer but let's face it. This isn't question where there is a way to answer in the middle. It is always yes or no. I think that it is crazy to think that the full extent of what went down is government controlled, but I think that there could be some other factors.
Anybody who has watched the news recently should be aware that no secrets are kept in Washington. Haters of the Bush Administration must realize that the Obama White House is the most secretive in history. The current administration promised transparency but never delivered. My point is that IRS targeting, NSA surveillance, facts about Benghazi, and even personal scandals (sex and drug scandals are plentiful every year) are things that the government would like to keep quite. As we know, everything gets leaked to the press eventually. Even if secrecy wasn't an issue, to plan all of this and execute the plan while framing middle eastern terrorists would be extremely complex. The government cannot even launch a single website without tons of problems (healthcare.Gov). Again, even if factions of the government felt that had enough power to full this off, and they could plan and execute it all in secrecy, one would have to ignore literally thousands of pieces of evidence that intelligence agencies have discovered. We know about the planning and subsequent actors in plot against America. You would have to throw out the entire official report; that is a far cry from filling in missing blanks or asking questions. I obviously can not go into a ton of detail but even Bin Laden would have had to have been in cahoots with the real planners of the attack to take credit publicly. We would have found out who attacked us really quickly even without anybody taking credit. Keep in mind Bin Laden and his cronies are all dead as a result of this attack. Everything he spent his life building was decimated because of this; not to mention they lost their hangout and the protection of the Afghani Taliban. To follow the conspiracy logic further, even in spite of all of that, one is required to accept that President Bust as well as others in the executive and probably the legislative branches of government are murderers. We have to believe that the leaders we selected to represent us are actually willing to kill us if they feel it will help them achieve their goals. So what was the goal? The most common answer from the "truthers" tends to be oil. I submit that we invaded Iraq for reasons unrelated to 9/11. The Bush administration did want oil from the middle east to enter the market to help keep our energy costs low. That does not mean the Bush and Cheney took the oil and claimed it for the United States so we could make a profit. Ideally they wanted gas and oil to be cheaper for the citizens of this country. Whether or not you like the tactic, the goal was to help out American citizens; and I really doubt they would destroy 2 of the tallest buildings in New York and the governments own military headquarters. We were attacked. It was tragic. There is no hyper-competent government and terrorists got one over on us.