posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 05:46 AM
Over the weekend I ended up having rather a heated discussion with a good friend of mine on the subject of 9/11. I normally try and avoid this emotive
topic with friends as it seems to have a tendency to open the proverbial can of worms. I ended the discussion by agreeing with him but I said I would
go back to him and try to show him a lot or all of his ‘facts’ were in fact, fiction.
The reason I backed down, (apart from having too much beer) was he was so adamant in what he believed was the ‘truth’ I actually started
questioning my own beliefs. My point is that the passage of time seems to distort people’s memory of events and what people forget they just seem to
Here are the points that my mate believed were true. Some of the points, most here will just laugh at but there are a couple of points (6 & 7) that it
would be nice to get clarification on because I haven’t seen them discussed before.
1. There was no such thing as WTC 7! “It was an elevator shaft or something! I’ve been there, there was no WTC 7 building” As I never went to
NYC before 9/11 I couldn’t categorically say he was lying.
2. There was no motive for the attacks, no-one benefited.
3. 9/11 and Iraq are not connected.
4. “It looked like a classic controlled demolition but this was caused by planes hitting the buildings.”
5. “There was no central core to the towers; each was supported by the external structure!” When I asked him how the elevators worked in the
building; “Well they worked in shafts in the middle!”
6. Each building was burning for in excess of 3 hours before it collapsed when I suggested the first one collapsed in under an hour the next point was
7. “No way man, I sat there and watched it for hours that morning on sky, they had this structural engineer bloke on there and before the towers
collapsed he was telling everyone they were going to collapse.” Now I was at work so obviously couldn’t refute his story but does anyone here know
of a report on sky with a chap predicting the collapse before it happened?
8. “Molten steel was caused by the jet fuel.”
9. “There’s been a full independent enquiry costing 100’s of millions of dollars.” Obviously he couldn’t name this enquiry apart from tell
me the conclusions were that it was a terrorist attack that brought down the towers.
10. “There were at least half a dozen fighter jets flying around NYC as the attacks were occurring!”
11. “FEMA were not in NYC that day, NIST report doesn’t exist!”
12. “With modern technology it would be easy to orchestrate the attack from a cave in Afghanistan.”
13. “Those guy’s (the terrorists) were top pilots, well trained and easily capable of flying a modern commercial jet.”
I gave up exasperated after the next point, I think you’ll see why;
14. “What do you mean a plane didn’t hit The Pentagon? What the f### man I’ve seen the pictures myself.”
“What pictures of a 757 hitting the side of The Pentagon?”
“Yeah it’s been all over the news, where have you been for the last 5 years man?”
The guy I was discussing this with is a very intelligent individual and to be honest I was astonished at what he believed in. He is happy with what he
has been told by the media and government and truly believes he knows all the facts. Unfortunately I feel it will be very difficult for the ‘truth
movement’ to convince people like this otherwise.