Just a little CONSerned

Common Sense & Family Matters

9/11 Do We Know The Truth?

Most of us can remember what we were doing when we heard about the attack in New York, but of course at first it was not called an attack. At first it was assumed to be a tragic plane crash, until the second plane hit. Then the Pentagon was hit, and reports of another hijacked plane. America was under attack, that much was obvious, but by whom? 1,000’s of people died that day, and many others will live with the horrific memories and scars. The United States declared the Taliban were responsible for the “terrorist” attack and vowed to bring them to Justice, and Osama Bin-Laden (leader of the Taliban) became the most wanted man in the world.

In the days and weeks following the collapse of the twin towers and building 7, there were many theories on how it happened. Words like implosion and controlled demolition started floating around, and were quickly dismissed as ridiculous. Experts told us that the towers collapsed because of the extreme heat generated by the jet fuel, and this melted the steel support beams. All the steel from both towers was quickly removed from the scene and sent to Asia to be melted down. Contrary to federal law, and most common law practices not to remove evidence from a crime scene. Many people objected to the removal of this evidence, and it is very strange indeed that this was done right away and so quickly. Pools of white hot molten steel was present at all 3 sites after the collapse of the buildings. This is evidence that Thermate was present and logically points to the cause of the support beams failing and the resulting collapse.

The Pentagon was also claimed to have been hit by an airplane, yet no video can be found of a plane hitting it. The most important and heavily protected building in the United States had a plane fly right into it and no video can be found of this? Not to mention the anti-aircraft defense system that seemed to fail, and no hole in the building where the wings and engines would have impacted.

There are many websites that have a great deal of links and evidence pointing to something other than the “official” version of events. I will provide some of them for you to look at and make up your own mind. It is not impossible that this did not happen the way we are being told, just something hard to believe. Is it possible that this was in part an inside job? Is it possible that the United States Government was involved in murdering 1,000’s of its own citizens? Is it possible that the hundreds of people who must have been involved have stayed quite, or have been silenced? The answers to those questions are tough.

But we can not ignore the evidence just because we don’t like the answer. Some of what they are claiming to be evidence just does not make sense. We are being asked to believe that 3 airplanes were hijacked by these “terrorists” and flew around for almost an hour before hitting their intended targets? No military aircraft were scrambled to intercept, yet there are 3 air bases within minutes of all the targets. It is hard to believe the United States air defense system is that inept and vulnerable. Are the air controllers that were responsible for those planes so incompetent as to let those planes fly for so long without any contact after deviating from course not to notify anyone?

http://www.911revisited.com/video.html
pay close attention to this part 36:10-105:00

http://www.911blogger.com/

http://www.ae911truth.org/

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmP2Vy8K0i0&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-0Ms7mId34

I am not what some people call a “911 truther” which is a term used to describe conspiracy theorists, I just would like to know the truth. Why was all the evidence removed so quickly if there was not anything to hide? Why were there pools of molten steel present weeks after the collapse? How did an airplane cause the damage to the Pentagon as they say? Why did building 7 collapse when it was not even hit? And why did a BBC reporter announce the collapse of building 7 on national TV 20 minutes before it actually happened? I would really like to know the answer to that!

Will we ever know the truth?

September 11, 2009 - Posted by Beast | All News | | 23 Comments

23 Comments »

  1. Ha Ha Ha

    Are you friggin kidding me…..Where is your evidence that no military aircraft were called upon.

    You and Rosie – fire can’t melt steel – O’Donnell ought to get together.

    If you insist on doing research ONLY from those sites that promote these conspiracy theories.

    There was recently a documentary about one of the planes that hit the tower on TV. The military pilots who were in the air spoke, as did the air traffic controllers who called on those military.

    I suppose that you think that Osama was just ‘joking’ when he took credit for the attacks, huh.

    Or maybe you think that ‘evil’ Bush hired him to bring down the towers.

    Your ‘theories’ can have holes blown all through them.

    Comment by Alberta Girl | September 11, 2009 | Reply

    • ALberta Girl,

      How’s this.

      # Failures to Intercept

      Interceptors were only scrambled from distant bases after long delays.

      * Despite the fact that Flights 11 and 175 were headed for New York City, no interceptors were scrambled from nearby La Guardia, or from Langley, Virginia.
      * Despite NORAD’s having received formal notification of the first hijacking at 8:38, no interceptors were scrambled from Andrews to protect the nearby Pentagon until after it was hit at 9:37.
      * The two F-15s scrambled from Otis AFB to chase Flight 11 flew at an average of 447 mph, about 23.8% of their top speed of 1875 mph.
      * The two F-16s scrambled from Langley to protect the capital flew at an average of 410.5 mph, about 27.4% of their top speed of 1500 mph.

      # Failures to Redeploy

      Nearby fighters on routine patrol duty were not redeployed to intercept the airliners, nor were fighters that belatedly reached Manhattan sent to defend the capital.

      * Two F-15s flying off the coast of Long Island were not redeployed to Manhattan until after the second Tower was hit.
      * The two F-15s scrambled from Otis AFB to protect Manhattan could have reached the capital in 9.6 minutes once they arrived over New York City. That was still 34 minutes before the Pentagon was hit.

      Comment by Beast | September 12, 2009 | Reply

  2. Truth is perception. So no, you will never get the truth as you perceive it to be.

    I watched a Discovery channel show on the ‘truther’ theories last night. It got to the point where these twits were making fools of themselves and they refused to give in.

    When proved that burning jet fuel turned a beam to rubber in three minutes the truther’s said it didn’t matter because it was explosives anyway. When they proved that the massive amount of explosives and months of pre-work required to set it up was inconceivable the truthers said Thermite. When they proved that 175 pounds of Thermite had no impact on a (smaller) beam they said “Super” Thermite that no one but the government knew existed.

    It was good for a laugh. I suggest you don’t get yourself caught up with these idiots if you want to be taken seriously.

    I don’t have the answers to your questions above but I’m pretty sure there’s a reasonable explanation if someone wanted to look hard enough.

    Comment by DRvachew | September 11, 2009 | Reply

  3. First it took months to clean up the site, how is that quickly? Pools of molten steel? are you sure you got this right? There would have to be a heat source of at least 2000 degrees f running continually for months for that to happen. Building 7 was indeed hit, by large pieces of the other towers as they fell. Perhaps the BBC reporter heard that the damaged building 7 was going to fall, or they expected it to fall any minute and he jumped the gun.

    Comment by Robert West | September 11, 2009 | Reply

    • Have you seen videos of building 7 collapsing? It went straight down exactly the same way as the towers. Straight down to the ground, into dust, in 6.5 seconds. This was caused by a few pieces of falling debris you say?

      Comment by Beast | September 11, 2009 | Reply

      • A few pieces? do you have any idea how large those building were? If the idea was to create a casus belli for whatever reason, what more would be gained destroying building 7 that would not be gained by just destroying buildings 1 and 2?

        Comment by Robert West | September 11, 2009 | Reply

        • Building 7 was over a football field’s distance away from the twin towers. With the amount of video cameras and news crews, not to mention private videos as well, if there any sizable chunks or pieces from the towers collapse hitting building 7 there would have been some sort of evidence of it. There is none. A gigantic piece of debris traveling a football field in the air hitting another building would have caught some kind of attention. I would think.

          Comment by Beast | September 11, 2009 | Reply

          • I is clear that neither of us will convince the other. back to my original question. Why take building 7 out at all would not the two largest be enough?

            Comment by Robert West | September 11, 2009 | Reply

            • Good question. What possible reason could there be for that? You might look at the tenants, and what else that building was “special” for. I look forward to seeing if you find out the same info as I did.

              Comment by Beast | September 11, 2009 | Reply

  4. Probably won’t ever know the truth about what really happened. Its a very controversial debate to have and often people shy away from it. Good to see you don’t.

    I have many talks with family friends who have expertise in building skyscrapers etc. and they even say there is no way the impact of a plane would cause that and that fast.

    I do wonder how people cant find it possible that the gov is a bit more corrupt and have other agenda’s than they thought.

    Comment by Butters | September 11, 2009 | Reply

  5. Look at that picture of the Pentagon, and if you believe that it was a Jet airliner that made that small hole and then “disappeared” fine. Go ahead and believe that. I for one, don’t believe every thing that Governments try to tell us.

    I have researched both sides of this issue. I’m not satisfied that what they are telling us is the truth. There are scientists on both sides of this issue, and that in itself is confusing. It should be obvious what happened and only one explanation, with scientific and/or forensic evidence to substantiate it. Unfortunately there isn’t.

    Comment by Beast | September 11, 2009 | Reply

  6. I would like to know the “reasonable explanation” you have about how there was no evidence of a plane that hit the Pentagon? Where did that plane go? Why is there a hole less then half the size of a plane left with a book still laying on the table within the building?

    Where did that plane go? Any rationally thinking human being can see that a plane did NOT hit that bulding, then so what was it? Where are the peoples remains that were on board. Where is the indestructable black boxes?

    Where is the airplane that went down in Pennsylania?

    Where are the “reasonable” explanations and I don’t mean the irrational ones that say the planes disintegrated or were swallowed up by the earth with zero evidence they ever existed.

    I would like those of you who feel the need to critisize the mere fact that someone doesn’t think all the facts add up here to look hard enough to warrant empty responses.

    Alberta girl wrote “If you insist on doing research ONLY from those sites that promote these conspiracy theories”.

    From where I stand, I don’t need to do any research, Most people can logically conclude from the pictures and lack of AIRPLANES and casualties that something is very very off with the stories.

    I don’t believe there is any insistence on “theories” coming from the writer. My take on the article is questioning the truth not supporting any “theories” and I believe the writer also stated that.
    The writer of this article has spent a very considerable amount of time on this issue and article and IMO ~ IT DOESN’T ADD UP!

    Comment by CeeA | September 11, 2009 | Reply

  7. After 9/11 I gave the “Truth” movement a chance.. did some research and was briefly caught up in the hype. Pretty soon I dismissed it all as nonsense because I couldn’t wrap my head around bush and his cronies planning and executing such an evil act.

    However, something never quite sat right with me. The official story just didn’t make sense. How the towers collapsed is almost irrelevant to me. What matters is who was behind such an evil act, what their motivations were and why it was allowed to occur.

    If you are looking for truth I suggest reading this article.. it avoids getting caught up in the ridiculous hyperbole that many truthers spew, and instead focuses tying the pieces of the puzzle together.

    Highly Recommended.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/9442970/Collateral-Damage-US-Covert-Operations-and-the-Terrorist-Attacks-on-September-11-200128062008

    http://www.israelshamir.net/Contributors/Collateral_Damage_Part_II_26122008.pdf

    Comment by Cdel | September 11, 2009 | Reply

  8. What about the people that were on their cell phones with loved ones,when they overtook the plane??
    Where is the plane that crashed in a field in Pa.??? How can a plane ever disintergrate??? Were ANY BLACK BOXES EVER RECOVERED???
    Beast THANK YOU so much for such an interesting article. REALLY MAKES ONE THINK!!!

    Comment by Terisa | September 11, 2009 | Reply

  9. How close were the towers from other buildings besides building 7? If closer or just as far how come they did not suffer the same fate as building 7?

    If someone who had a key to every door in the towers who helped people get out believes this wasn’t caused by the planes.. then who would?

    Try watching the movie instead of the youtube posts because although they are thought provoking, I found the movie made more of an impact. Like its said in the movie look at the truth and it will lead you away from what the gov. wants to say happened. What we do know should be enough.. Why would they say building 7 is going to explode why do they use the word explode? Fire doesn’t make things explode..

    http://www.911revisited.com/video.html

    Comment by Butters | September 11, 2009 | Reply

    • Interesting choice of words, wasn’t it. And there are many other buildings that are much closer to where the towers used to be, and they sustained no damage whatsoever.

      Comment by Beast | September 11, 2009 | Reply

    • Butters, thanks for that.

      The terrorists deliberately selected planes that were going cross country, fully loaded with fuel. I don’t think we have anything to compare this tragedy to. What other buildings do we know that had big loaded jet planes crash into them?

      I have seen buildings razed. Yes they fall in the same way – pancake down. Read a long time ago that the metal structures in the corners of each floor, melted from the extreme heat, coming from the burning of the jet fuel. I don’t know if they had center supports – because of asthetics. I don’t think they did. Weren’t they both hit sort of near the corners? Wouldn’t surprise me if these creeps didn’t get the blue prints of the structures as part of their research.

      Comment by heart | September 12, 2009 | Reply

  10. I couldn’t BELIEVE a plane crashed in my state of PA. Finally, I learned why. What a great group of real MEN. They knew they were going to die because their families told them what was going on, and they and chose to bring the plane down in a field, probably saving thousands of lives had their mission been accomplished. Did they ever find out where that plane was headed? I remember the 911 operator heard his last words …”LET’S ROLL!” AND WITH NO WEAPONS against their box cutters, etc.

    Want to read more about building 7, but I do know they love to create fear in us. Death all over, showing how powerful and brilliant they are? This was a very coordinated attack.

    My Uncle learned something about them in WWII. He was home only 30 minutes, and I remember him sitting in that chair saying “I HATE THOSE G.D. ARABS!!!” I guess he knew about beheading, how they use children, wives, etc. He wouldn’t say more. Maybe he was in north Africa?

    Comment by heart | September 11, 2009 | Reply

  11. I have a good friend who is a recently retired NY Policeman.

    Anyone have any questions they want me to ask him? I will collect them for maybe 3 days from here, then write to him. I know him from the jazz list – he plays trombone.

    I also have a young nephew who teaches in NY. I can ask him too – but he is slow in answering.

    Also have an older female friend, widow of a PhD. Could ask her too.

    Let me know have the questions. Might be interesting.

    Comment by heart | September 12, 2009 | Reply

  12. Alberta girl said : “I suppose that you think that Osama was just ‘joking’ when he took credit for the attacks, huh”

    Take a look at your choice of words….TOOK CREDIT…that is very different from someone admitting guilt.

    To take credit is too gain infamey and inflate an already super sized ego and grandiose self image.

    Inmates take “credit” for all kinds of crimes they haven’t committed to feed their ego’s. Let me ask you this, what kind of people do this?

    Mentally unstable people! Are you telling me that you would believe anything OSAMA says? Are you saying that because he says it was him that it must acutally be true?

    Do you think a monster like Bin Laden is of sound mind? What makes you believe what this idiot says to be true and you don’t believe your own eyes and logic?

    What sources do you insist on basing your opinions on?

    Alberta girl said: ” Your ‘theories’ can have holes blown all through them.”

    How about the official theory? How many holes do you see in it?

    Comment by CeeA | September 12, 2009 | Reply

  13. http://whathappenedtohealth.blogspot.com/

    If this can happen in our health care system, what makes anyone think it can’t happen anywhere else?

    Comment by CeeA | September 12, 2009 | Reply

  14. Beast, CA, you know I love ya…

    As an American, Polish American, Middle Eastern you coming 2 my sons birthday party? (Hey, shut up! I wanna try da food!)

    Yach ja mash?

    Old Polack…

    I remember this.

    Phan Thị Kim Phúc
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Jump to: navigation, search
    In this Vietnamese name, the family name is Phan. According to Vietnamese custom, this person should properly be referred to by the given name Phúc.

    8 June 1972: Kim Phúc, center left, running down a road near Trang Bang after a South Vietnamese Air Force napalm attack. (Nick Ut /AP)Phan Thị Kim Phúc, O.Ont (born 1963) is a Vietnamese-Canadian best known as the child subject of a Pulitzer Prize winning photograph taken during the Vietnam War on June 8 1972

    Old country.

    Polish American.- For my own reasons…..

    Comment by Cubby | September 18, 2009 | Reply


Leave a comment