Posted Sept 16, 2010
first want to state that I have no problem with Blayne or anyone else bringing up honest objections to anything I write. Contrary to some critics, we do have independent thinkers here. Blayne has a very good mind that I admire and would much rather have him on my side, but when he is not I find must have very sound arguments.
Blayne points out one anomaly in the world trade Center collapse and that is the apparent free fall of WTC#7. Contrary to some conspiracy reports the other two did not freefall.
Most engineers and researchers who have looked into this do not see anything defying the laws of physics.
Now let us say that there was a demolition. One could use Blayne’s argument even here. He says to have a freefall you have to have no resistance. Are you telling me that a demolition can remove all resistance from the entire structure of a building? That doesn’t sound logical either. Yet we saw the building collapse at near freefall so we know it can be done. Now some say it fell faster than freefall so that also would seemingly defy the laws of physics no matter how you spin it.
Where has there ever been a free fall of a building 47 stories or higher from a proven demolition?
If a group of engineers could have planned 911 in advance none could have accurately predicted all the anomalies. That is because every big event that has ever happened before has anomalies that were unforeseen.
Before we landed a spacecraft on Venus scientists made many predictions that were wrong. But then when our instruments showed us the true reality we had to accept it. The same goes for our discoveries on Titan. No one was able to predict them all.
The granddaddy of them all was the moon landing. Many anomalies occurred that amateur scientists thought defied the laws of physics and the Moon Landing Hoax Theory was born. I would think that those who believe 911 was a conspiracy would also be convinced of the Moon Hoax arguments because they are even more convincing. I might consider them myself except for one thing.
We have proof positive that we went to the moon.
And just like 911 such a hoax would have to involved thousands of people who never talked about it.
In such a vast conspiracy such silence would be totally impossible.
The military cannot even keep any of its secrets. Even many that may endanger our service people’s lives are exposed through wikileaks publishing on the internet.
Now if do-gooders are motivated to reveal secrets that may endanger lives wouldn’t they be much more motivated to reveal the secrets of 911 when apparently evil conspirators are involved???
Such a leaker could go down in history as a great hero.
Here is a list of reasons I cannot swallow the 911 conspiracy theory.
(1) No clear motive.
One may say the motive is to give the government an excuse to take away our freedoms. Well Obama is doing a better job of that than any president we ever had and he completely ignores the 911 disaster. He is proof that 911 just was not needed if this was the plan.
(2) The chances of being exposed with such a complex conspiracy involving thousands of people would be too high.
(3) If there was a real conspiracy we would have had dozens of leaks by now, some appearing on 60 minutes.
(4) All three buildings were damaged by heat and fire. Why did tremendous heat and fire not set off the explosive charges in all three buildings long before they fell? The wiring would have also been short circuited by the heat and fire.
(5) The collapse of the Twin towers happened from the top down. This has never in the history of the planet happened to a large building through demolition. Why would conspirators attempt something that has never been tested or proven to work???
(6) There are no demolition-like sounds of explosives. Just watch the difference in this film:
That alone ought to convince a fair-minded person that no demolition was involved.
(7) I’ve studied both sides piece by piece and in each case the traditional argument makes the most sense. The only thing that raises a red flag at all is the anomaly of the free fall of WTC7 but a free fall through demolition seems just as mysterious for you still have resistance to overcome.
(8) The disaster took a trillion dollars out of our economy and more if you count the wars. How would conspirators benefit by such a loss? No one seemed to benefit but the real villains – Islamic terrorists.
(9) Turner Construction which is accused of setting the explosives had offices in the Twin Towers that were destroyed. Why weren’t their offices in a safe location if they knew what was going to happen?
If we look at the whole disaster the list could go on and on.
Keith quoting me:
writes the following,”…And just like 911 such a hoax would have to
involved thousands of people who never talked about it. In such a vast
conspiracy such silence would be totally impossible…”
There are examples of huge projects where many people have been involved and the
secret has been kept for many years and sometimes decades.
The three that come to mind are the Manhattan Project, Ultra Secret, and J.J.’s
own previous life conspiracy when he tried to eliminate Hitler. Silence is not
totally impossible. All of these projects involved large numbers of personnel
and were kept secret for a very long time.
As Ruth indicated it is possible to plan a conspiracy without being discovered. The reason for this is obvious. Often the conspirators are planning something of which no one is suspicious. The Nazis knew we were working on the bomb and we knew they were but did not know the details.
as soon as the bomb went off all our enemies went into hyperdrive to discover all the details. Sadly, Stalin discovered all our atomic secrets and this gave him a big advantage in developing his own nuclear program.
Then as soon as Valkyrie was executed most of the conspirators were revealed.
Now imagine this. Suppose the real purpose of the Manhattan project was to bomb New York. Do you think they could have kept that secret? No. it would have been revealed before the act. To think they could have bombed New York and blamed it on the Nazis and then nine years later most people still accept this because no leakers surface is just too fantastic to believe. Even so nine years after 911 there has not been one lowly laborer for the conspiracy to come forward.
The Pentagon probably has the most sophisticated video surveillance system in the world. Why
Let us just suppose that there was a conspiracy and they had power to make sure no videos would be taken. This is essential because they are going to send a missile and not a plane. They are going to hijack the plane in midair and kill all the passengers and dispose of the plane.
Now they have a major problem. Even though they have control of the Pentagon videos they have no control of videos made by citizens. When they send the missile there is at least a 50/50 chance that some citizen will take a video of the event that will clearly show what attacked the Pentagon. When considering this do you think they will take the chance of being exposed? I certainly wouldn’t if I were a conspirator.
In addition a number of eye witnesses have come forth and stated that it was a plane and not a missile that hit the Pentagon. I heard one witness on Coast to Coast say that he was on the ground and close enough to the plane to actually see some passengers through the windows just before it crashed.
I do not believe the Pentagon only has one poor quality video. I work at a paper mill and you can not enter the site without being caught on a high quality camera. There is a Sony plant across the street which has even better video surveillance of their premises. To think that the defensive nerve center of the western world has only one poor quality video of this plane hitting their building is preposterous.
(The real question is why they won’t release any video? I can only speculate their is something more amiss than an imagined cruise missile. The whole government stance on 911 is a continual lack of candor. One would think they want the public to believe in these conspiracies. The same applies to the moon landings. We have the technology to clearly photograph the landing modules on the moon but never produce anything but grainy shadow photos. Both 911 and the alleged moon hoaxes can be put to rest, but the government does not seem interested in providing the necessary proof.)
Actually, you are the first person I’ve heard bring this up. I did a little digging and found that the one video that was released was not taken by the Pentagon but by a nearby Motel. If the Pentagon has videos they do not seem to be saying much. Unfortunately, the government is so secretive they look guilty even if they are not. Since we have 136 eye witnesses any video released shouldn’t have anything surprising in it. They confiscated the one video that was released and had to be sued before they released it. You’d think it would therefore have something sinister in it, but then there was nothing. Here’s a video to fuel your interest.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey