Do you belive 9/11 was a inside job ?

Question

I have seen a lot of different veiws, what is your opinion on this subject .

Answer 1

This could get long ...

Did you know the Empire state building was his by a plane in 1945? This collision was a big reason why WTC 1 and 2 were built to with stand a hit from a 707.  http://www.nytstore.com/ProdDetail.aspx?...

In 1993 WTC 1 had a car bomb containing 1,500 pound of explosive which included  aluminum, magnesium and ferric oxide. It didn't collapse into tower 2 as planned. There was also an FBI informant named Emad Salem that says the FBI had knowledge of this bomb and did nothing.

IN 1983 the Beruit Marine barracks were attacked with a car bomb containing 12,000 pounds of explosives. Look at the damage caused and ask, how is that building still standing?

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/09/07/us...

WTC 7 was not hit with a plane and yet pancaked like WTC 1 and 2. Larry Silverstein, on tape said they decided to "pull" it. In demolition that if a term demolish a building with explosives. If you don't know who he is - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Silve...

His lease gave Silverstein, as leaseholder, the right to rebuild the structures should they be destroyed and should he comply with the onerous financial obligations of the lease.

That is a strange lease considering the building had been fine up to that point.

There are other things to consider - like the melting point of steel and that Iron workers still use Acetylene torches that operate at temperatures of 5800 °F to 6300 °F. Kerosene, (jet fuel), doesn't burn that hot. As well, when you light fuel on fire like that it is consumed very quickly - so the fire that continued to burn wasn't fueled by kerosene but by flammable objects like paper and desks. Look at the picture on this website - or search for your own.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc1_w...

Do you see a raging inferno inside?

Until 9/11 no steel structure had been brought down by fire, on that day it happened 3 times and one of the wasn't even hit by a plane, (it apparently also did no have a fire extinguishing system in it as the was no jet fuel involved in this one).

Also, what are the odds that both WTC 1 and 2 would not only pancake but fall at the same rate as if there was no resistance from the structure that hadn't been melted/weakened from fire? And why did WTC 7 pancake?

On to the pentagon... if a plane hit the pentagon why was there no damage to the front lawn in front of the building and why was the damage smaller than the plane that hit it?

I hate to think of myself as a conspiracy theorist, but I think there are way to many questions without reasonable answers. And if Osama is really the mastermind, why isn't he wanted for 9/11 on the FBI's most wanted list?  http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/ter...

Something isn't right about the events on that day and how it all went down.

Answer 2

I do believe so. The official story is fairy tale and the principles of physics do not add up neither does history agree with it.

Answer 3

Yes.  a reasonable person just watching the tapes alone with no news media or soundbites. would say it is impossible to bring down those buildings with planes that nearly missed towers.  in the history of steel building they have never gone down without using demolition.  no matter how hot the fire.  america needed a wake up call to embolden our spirit and go on the war path. it worked.

Answer 4

No chance whatsoever.

Answer 5

Yes it was first thought of by Martin Luther King, then George Bush followed through with it with the help of Lex Luther and The Joker.

But Shhhhh dont let anyone know I told you.

Answer 6

Nope.

What good would it have done if it was?  Seriously, the current administration has shown time and time again that they will do whatever they want whenever they want.  So why would they have needed to carry out those attacks?

Answer 7

There are criminal elements inside the government that either allowed the attacks to happen unchallenged, or they were involved with carrying out the events, or both.  The evidence of foreknowledge and complicity is compelling.  Check out these compilations.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...

http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/forek...

http://www.rense.com/general24/t500.htm

http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/dece...

What is most important now is to stop the criminals from their continued exploitation of 9/11 to achieve their criminal aims, including the undermining of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Our freedom is at stake.

To get you thinking about the larger picture, I recommend Mike Ruppert's serious 9/11 film.  It is not about demolitions, missiles, etc.  It is about geopolitics (and how oil relates thereto), criminality in government, evidence of foreknowledge of 9/11 and the exploitation of 9/11.

The Truth & Lies Of 9/11

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

Ruppert only begins to connect the dots when the film ends somewhat abruptly.  I mention that because if you are unaware of that, you might be led to believe that the geopolitical motivations for 9/11 exploitation are merely about oil.  That is not so.  Oil is part of it.  For the globalists to move ahead with their one-world government aspirations, it is necessary to install globalist-friendly governments in the Middle East as well as secure effective control over the world's oil supplies.  At the end of the film, Ruppert does tie that all together, but only very briefly.  His connecting of the dots is so brief it may go un-noticed by viewers not paying attention.

Another point Ruppert fails to drill home is that our Constitution and Bill of rights are major impediments for those behind the push for one-world government.  He talks about 9/11 undermining civil liberties, but he doesn't clearly connect the dots for you.  Ruppert's failure to connect the dots for the viewer have resulted in his being accused of being a "gatekeeper" (that is protecting the criminals by distracting attention toward peak oil, away from global government).  That may be so, but I think it more likely that he simply has a passion to stay alive.  In any event, the film is excellent to watch for the purpose of making you think about the larger picture behind 9/11.

Also learn about the neocon think tank known as "Project for a New American Century" (PNAC).  Learn who the players are and their ties to the Bush administration. Read their manifesto and compare their geopolitical ideology to what was presented in the Ruppert film.  The similarities are not coincidental.  It should not be shocking that people such horrific ideology wind up in positions of power.  Criminals are attracted to power.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info...

http://www.essentialliberties.com/archiv...

Learn about the global government aspirations of the Council on Foreign Relations.  Learn about how the CFR effectively controls our foreign policy.

http://faculty.maxwell.syr.edu/merupert/...

http://presidentialcandidates.wetpaint.c...

Look up the activities of PNAC members in the capacity as members of the Council on Foreign Relations.

How convenient was it that a single event, 9/11, served as a catalyst for everything required for the traitors to kick their global government agenda into high gear!  If the reasons for the exploitation of 9/11 interest  you, I suggest asking a question specifically about that.

The main stream media is complicit in the 9/11 cover-up, so don't wait for it to inform.  If you wish to know how and why the media muzzles the 9/11 truth, ask a question specifically about that.  There are not enough characters available in one answer to cover all of the points.  BTW, Popular Mechanics is nothing more than main stream media propaganda.  Even NIST debunks Popular Mechanics.

There is also a profit motive for 9/11.  Do some research to learn about who profits from war and  the war on terror. You should be angered by it.  Main stream media owners are among those profiting.  Research General Electric for example.

Lastly, it is important learn about the 9/11 Commission and it's flaws.  That is also too large a topic to cover here.  If it interests you, ask a question specifically about that.  You can find some reading about it here:

http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/comm...

http://911research.wtc7.net/post911/prob...

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/comm...

If you follow up with your own research, be careful what you read.  There are staged government disinformation sites all over the web, designed to throw you off and to discredit the truth movement by putting forth ridiculous theories that are easily debunked (e.g. the "no planes theory" for 9/11). There are paid government disinformation agents all over the internet, posing as regular users in forums such as this one. Generally, if the people presenting a web site are not willing to be named (and you cannot verify that they are real people), I would recommend confirming what you read there from sites where owners do disclose who they are. Some of my Yahoo Contacts had a discussion about that recently when one of them noticed what appears to be a 9/11 disinformation site. See:-

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Avoid using a movie like Zeitgeist to form an opinion.  The underlying warnings of Parts Two and Three are spot on, but it is a movie. Fact-based movies never present a complete picture nor are they 100% factual.  Similarly, also avoid citing the documentary Loose Change as "proof".  It contains some errors which has, unfortunately, caused people to erroneously dismiss the entire film.  If you cite Loose Change as a source, you will often get attacked even if the part your are sourcing is correct. The film is to be credited with waking people up and it’s a shame it wasn't a bit more thoroughly researched up front.

I like the following site for 9/11 research because it is good about citing sources and generous with hyperlinks to those sources.

http://911research.wtc7.net/

Answer 8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTl9jdPOe...