I had a friend come by earlier and we ended up talking about some serious topics,mainly 9/11.Now im curious about what people on here think about the whole situation.In case you been hiding under a rock - theres A LOT of inconsistencies with the official report for the whole thing.

Here is some of them...


-WTC buildings burned for 1 and 2 hours before they completely collapsed straight down.They are the ONLY steel sky scrapers to ever fall.Even others that have burned for over 15 hours did not fall.
-The fire never burned hot enough for the steel to melt,much less start falling.
-All the steel from the scene was quickly sold right away as scrap to other countries.
-Scrap steel that was tested did come back positive for explosives but nothing else has been researched about it.
-Gov spent $65 million investigating Clintons affair,they only allowed $15 million for the 9/11 commission.
-Building 7 was never even hit by a plane but it fell down like nothing.Fires are said reason why it fell even though a fire has never ever took a steel skyscraper down - except the WTC.
-Building 7 happened to have lots of important documents regarding Enron,etc.All were destroyed of course with no backups.
-Tons of people who saw the plane say it wasn't a commercial plane.
-Supposed guys flying the huge jets couldn't even fly the tiny planes in school,failed completely.
-Pentagon had no wreckage AT ALL of a place including the indestructible engines.
-The day BEFORE 9/11,Donald Rumsfeld disclosed that more than $2 TRILLION dollars of pentagon funding couldn't be accounted for.The next day the "plane" hit the part of the pentagon that was holding all the paperwork that would show where the $$$ went.Of course everything was lost in the fire.
-Pentagon has more security cameras than anywhere else in the US.Not 1 vid of a plane hitting the building has ever been released.
-Out of 3 hijacked planes that flew for 40+ minutes over heavy populated air space,none were intercepted by US defense jets.Several were assigned to go in opposite directions for whatever reason.

List goes on and on really,those are just some of the top of my head.

So what are yall's views on 9/11? Do you believe everything happened how the government told it?

 

 

This is a sticky subject for sure (and not the forum kind). I'll just say that a responsible citizen should not take what their government says for granted. They're definitely not our buddies, but the folks we choose to represent us in matters concerning the running of the country. Checking up on how they are performing that role from an objective (and subjective) point of view is something we all should be doing (and don't nearly do often enough). So no, I don't trust our government. I don't think they necessarily have evil intentions, but it's made up of people, and people whose character doesn't have the best reputation in the world, honestly.

As far as 9/11 goes, I've heard plausible things and obviously BS things. The trouble is I've heard them from folks who say the official story really is the way it is, and from folks who say it was one big coverup.

As far as the buildings are concerned, one of my engineering professors in college was on the review board that investigated the WTC collapse. He's a competent structural engineer and was as aware as anyone about the structures of those particular buildings and what happened to them, so I'm inclined to differ to his analysis that the building can and did fall due to the aircraft impacts. Can't explain it myself, I'm afraid, but that's what he and the rest of the board found.

 

I don't trust our government but I certainly don't believe all the conspiracy theorists and armchair experts. I'm not sure what additional speculation by armchair experts is supposed to accomplish...

I'm no materials expert myself but from what I recall, steel doesn't need to melt for a critical failure like that. Whether or not other steel buildings have collapsed from fires is irrelevant unless those buildings were struck by a fully fueled jet.

 

I think the biggest red flag comes more from the fact of how the buildings fell which was straight down.Had the building leaned from impact and up then yes that would make sense.When buildings fall directly into their footprint its because of explosives being under it.

Whether we believe the "armchair experts" theories or not,how do you explain all the suspicious behavior in general by the govt? Stuff that we all know for sure happened.Long list of stuff up there.

 

Here is a good vid,another member posted it here a while back.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3MN9382eGY

2hrs long so not meant to be watched during your lunch break.

 

Flying a plane is easy. It's the take offs and landings that are difficult. There could be plenty of things that would cause a pilot to not get his pilot's license such as ground school.

As to fires, it wasn't just a fire that brought down the two towers. The structures also had impact damage. The tower didn't collapse from the ground up. They collapsed from the top down and the steel beams were experiencing stresses that were out of design scope.

 

There was a youtube video that was continually deleted and erased of a person showing government blocked searches for 9/11. He would type a search info into google along with some specific coding and it would display sites that met the search criteria, but were blocked and by whom. Many of these sites were 9/11 conspiracy sites as well as national and local news reporting on the event all stating blocked by gov. I have tried searching for it many times, but have never been able to find it again. I believe there was some slide of hand that had happened, but who knows what really occurred. There are several interesting discussions on yahoo answers with some pretty stunning evidence, including video of the explosions happening.

 

Lol... like my AE friends used to say: "Fly in the middle of the air. The edges are where the trouble is."