What made you first suspect that the 9/11 official story was false.

When I heard about the 3rd building, WTC 7, that was not hit by a plane.

Also, buildings cant destroy themselves completely. Newton's 3rd law.

The fire that NIST claims completely destroyed WTC 7 was burned out an hour before the collapse.

Barry Jennings and Michael Hess were trapped on 8th floor in building 7 for an hour and a half. NIST said it was because of the twin towers collapsing they were trapped. barry Jennings mysteriously died shortly before NIST's report.

Here is AE911truth's newest video about building 7.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

What made you first suspect that the 9/11 official story was false?

Building 7
/thread

Hearing about exactly what was going to happen about a month before. Do you think real terrorists would really announce their plans? No.

To make it brief, the information brought forward by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has forever swayed my opinion. Engineer Jon Cole did fantastic work and disproved National Geographic and Mythbusters. I thought that was incredible. My world view changed forever after this realization. I will never again look at things the same way.

I was uncomfortable for me from the start, but seeing David Ray Griffin on C-Span made my Jaw Drop, I think it was in 2003. Ever since I seek out new information almost Daily, if not Daily.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Speaking for myself...the part about the terrorists passport flying out of his pocket, surviving the fireball/blazing wreckage of the plane and landed out in the open to be found.

I remember hearing that in the news and figuring the whole official story was not only fake, but also meant that something serious was in the works. Yet, this is the official story that is repeated everywhere.

That was also when I realized that 9/11 did not just trigger a war on "terror" but also the war on SANITY.

edit on 29-9-2011 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

My first idea that something was not right was after seeing the wreckage from (i forget the name of the airliner) the plane that "crashed", i mean there was not enough debris for there to have been a plane crash.

Initial reaction was that the plane had been shot down from looking at news footage (when confirmed it had crashed in a field by officials). This is where i guess i started to see the lies.

I think about a week later i started looking into the WTC7 collapse, and that's when i became full of the "thats not right" feeling.

Also a while after (maybe a year or so) i learned of the "poofing" that came form the towers as they collapsed, which were explained by people as demolition charges. I am still convinced explosives were used to topple the towers.

For me it was a chain of events that started almost on the first day. For instance they had enough "intelligence" to determine it was "orchestrated" by OBL within hours. Then, within a day or two had identified 19 "hijackers". Really? You didn't detect it coming but withing a day or two you knew exactly whodunnit? How does that work? At that point I had questions but still believed the OS

Then when they started removing evidence and trucking it off. It was on the fast track to China before the stock market opened back up. Why wouldn't you give it to a US steel mill to melt down? Like U.S. Steel? We gave it to China and they in turn SELL it back to us.

What put me over the top was the fact that flight 77 burrowed through 6 walls and left a nice, neat, clean hole on the inner wall of the 3rd ring. No way in hell. And, the precision with which that pilot flew. He manage to come in low and enter the building at ground level without ever hitting the ground. Then inside that hole was a book on a stool and a computer monitor that didn't melt or burn. I then wondered, TPTB expect us to believe that when the planes hit the twin towers, the fuel wasn't 100% spent in the firey explosion but ran down the staircase, elevator shaft and burned in the building for up to 15 minutes...in fact long enough to melt the beams or at least weaken them to the point of collapse. BUT, the Pentagon didn't burn inside. There are clearly unburned items inside the hole that are still intact. Why is that? Why did the Pentagon crash behave differently than the twin towers crash?

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


I am not entirely convinced 9/11 was "an inside job" the only part of the OS I don't believe is that it is a complete account of the events. I think it might be false by omission far more than by stating falsehoods. That said, I think the inconsistencies surrounding building 7 come to mind as highly suspect.

On the subject of the engineering analysis of the twin tower collapse, given that I am an engineer I think it is very crazy that people on either side can claim to be able to predict what a structure like that would do or would not do during a one of a kind event. So all I can say is that I don't know and that anybody who claims they know without the shadow of a doubt how the towers fell (on either side of the argument) clearly does not understand the very limits of our ability to measure and predict. This is more than just an opinion, this is predicated on the lack of data for a truly accurate model.

-rrr

The look on the presidents face and that he sat there for 10 mins before doing anything.

Never, I'm normal and sane

Nothing.

To think 9/11 was a conspiracy requires us to believe any administration would be willing or able to perpetrate something this horrific on their own people. Bush isn't, Obama isn't, nor would the underlings of either administration able to carry something like this off in secret.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


For me it was the micro-smirk on W's face immediately after he was told we were "under attack" .

Originally posted by jaguarsky
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

For me it was the micro-smirk on W's face immediately after he was told we were "under attack" .

Wow. I wish I had your eyes, being able to see micro-smirks on people and proceed to make judgement about their motivations and involvements with a conspiracy theory developed in hindsight of the event.

Just saying...

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Bush's legacy in CIA and his OIL company and his speech about a New World Order on the 11 September 1991.

Bin laden a CIA tactician.

Collapse of WTC 7

Country That us invaded after 9/11 or stealth wars

Now the 9/11 commemorations have come and gone, and our country is still at war. Sometimes it seems that one way or another the United States is at war against almost the whole world:

•Official (though undeclared) wars in and against Afghanistan and Iraq
•Official (but not really a war "because U.S. troops aren’t the ones at risk") war in Libya
•Unofficial (though sort of acknowledged) war in Pakistan
•Unacknowledged (because murder-by-drone doesn’t count as war) war in Yemen and Somalia
•Indirect and diplomatic war (through $30 billion military aid enabling Israel’s occupation and by promising another UN veto) against Palestine
•Unacknowledged and denied (through still-stealth drone campaigns) war in uncertain venues mainly in Africa, Asia and the Middle East
•Untitled (though still accurately described as the Global War on Terror) war in the whole world
•Then there’s the not-exactly-military war, like the war against the poor in the United States because of the hundreds of billions, now trillions, of tax dollars wasted on all those other wars.

Source

reply to post by getreadyalready

I became suspicious when the plane hit the Pentagon, and the stories about the passengers on the phone when the plane went down in Shanksville. It was unbelieveable to me that after the first 2 strikes, the other planes would still be flying around, basically undetected or undeterred. No way our Department of Defense allows the strike on the Pentagon, or the plane in Pennsylvania.

The "plane" hitting the Pentagon is also what made me immediately question what they were telling us .....but for kind of a different reason.

I was glued to the TV that morning and remember those scenes as if I had just seen them.
For about 10 -15 minutes one of the news channels was showing the Pentagon literally right after it was hit..... the second I saw the hole in the pentagon I thought it was a bomb or missile of some sort but never a plane. And when the commentator said it was a plane .... my jaw dropped and I kept thinking there is no way that was a plane.... I have been on planes since I was a toddler and know just how big they are once you get on one.

Eitherway.... that was it ..... they showed the Pentagon for about 15 minutes before the fire and collapse happened which made it look like something bigger hit it.

I first questioned the official story when I heard there had been puts on the airline stocks of those airlines associated with the planes involved. Makes sense that advance info had to have gotten out to allow this play to occur. Greed raises it's ugly head...some with a greed for power and some with a greed for money.

I had long held the opinion that something was not right about the OS. I didn't want to believe the US government could have been complicit. While "allowed it" and "caused it" are both wrong, there is a big difference between the two. That state of mind lasted until I watched "National Security Alert - 9/11 Pentagon Attack" by Citizen Investigation Team. I found the eyewitness testimony of people who had worked in Arlington for many years very compelling. But the big moment for me was toward the end of the video, when they were interviewing Lloyde England, who was driving a taxi-cab next to the Pentagon when the explosion happened. His story did not make sense. He was clearly lying, even in the face of damning evidence. I found myself getting sick to my stomach. The final thread was cut when the filmmakers pointed out the obvious and inmistakeable marks that had been created by the streetlights (supposedly sliced in two by the jet's low approach) being dragged across the road. There was no way to refute those marks. At that moment, my blood ran cold and I saw my country in a new and sickening light. Mr. England goes on to make some very damning statements about having been paid to tell his false story. By that time I was officially an unbeliever. I recommend this video to anyone that hasn't seen it. Unfortunately, I don't know how to place a link to the video, but I know it's available on You Tube, Vimeo, topdocumentaryfilms.com, and citizeninvestigationteam.com, and probably other sites as well.

It bothered me that there is a science behind building demolitions and that they have to precisely time explosive devices to bring a building straight down. Though, someone here on the site proved that buildings could be brought down with timed charges put at the middle of the building - using the weight of upper floors to bring everything down. Yet, again, - these were achieved with planning involved.

Yet, here we have towers coming straight down with just a random act of demolition through the impact of jet liners.

Either the people who demolish buildings are really stupid, or we're being set up to believe that any random hit of explosive materials is good enough. Sure, it is possible that the Jet liners hit some of the key parts of the steel frame - and potentially their speed had something to do with it - but a random angular hit on a building that is much wider than the planes?

Building 7 is inexplicable by any martians standards, and so is the hit at the pentagon with no evidence - someone cleaned up, or we are claiming that a jet liner completely incinerated - no steel or anything left behind.

I don't think that building 7 was the act of a separate terrorist group who happened to co-ordinate the day of *their* attack with Osama Bin Laden. That building came straight down as well.

The insurance on the towers, the EPA condemnation of the buildings and the short selling of American Airlines stock - these are evidence of motives for such things. The rushed clean up was necessary to cover up - if it were a conspiracy then, nothing short of this could/should have happened.

I believe that it was just a concocted excuse to go to war and give friends of the GOP some pocket money - the taxpayer foots the war, and no one knows any better. IRAQ was the same thing - taxpayer foots the bill, and some oil companies make big profits - not to mention the fact that the US gets a dedicated source of oil supply at a time when there is a growing energy crisis. Bush *is* an oil man himself.

COMMON SENCE!
Really ,folks cannot see for them selves? USE your EYES... do some research. This is not NORMAL!

I think what did it for me was the pentagon crash...A beoing 747 suspossed crashed into it.. and left a 16x16 hole? with no windows shattered? Shortly after I saw that, I went back to fox, and watched the second tower collapse.. and it fell almost straight down.. as if it was detonated.. it was already leaning just a bit.. but didnt fall sideways? Then about 2-3 hours after the towers fell.. there was interviews with those in and around ground zero. And I remember one specific guy that said he herd timed explosions just before the second tower fell.. As well as numerous cops said they smelled the type of explosives used to detonate such buildings... But overall, the pentagon crash is what did it for me.. thousands of cameras in and around the pentagon.. and all they have is a 15 second clip from across the street at a gas station.. and its broken down into 5 frames?? get real. get truth. dont listen to MSM.