Does anyone believe the alternative explanation to what happened on September 11 2001?

Question

What they are implying is mind-blowing but they do have a lot of evidence to support their claims (UK only answers please)

Just to prove I'm not talking rubbish if you want check out the following clip. It clearly shows that there is something not quite right about the collapse of the second tower. You have to remove the spaces

video.google. co.uk/videoplay ?docid= 2638 9755580 38550089

I SAID UK ANSWERS ONLY PLEASE.

MOST US CITIZENS ARE LIKE LEMMINGS

Answer 1

It is rather rude of you to limit the answers to UK only. It did happen to the US.

that aside I think that snowy had a perfect answer.

and you should not be insulting americans so much in a question about the worst terrorist attack on their soil.

Answer 2

The key word in your question is "evidence".

I have read a few of the books which lay out the conspiracy theories and they are fascinating and thought provoking. However....

I realised quite early on that what was presented as "evidence" actually wasn't evidence at all, but very eloquent conjecture and hearsay presented in a compelling way.

If you read it carefully so called experts are rarely named, and where they are named a quick background check will prove them not to be quite as expert as suggested.

Also some quite technical things are presented in such a detailed way that they layman would not question them because you assume a level of integrity and expertise in the author. This is again however flawed.

I have seen a number of televised interviews with experts from renowned structural engineers, through to experienced firefighters and disaster control personnel, who are not in the least bit surprised at the way the towers and building seven collapsed given the evidence of what they saw. These people are referenceable and visible, the people behind the conspriacy theories are not.

A previous answerer talks about "all the scientific evidence" supporting the alternative theories, but that is simply not true. All the scientifice evidence I have seen presented by real people and experts in the field support the official version of events, including people who designed and built the towers.

New York is close to my heart and I have no doubt in my mind that what happened there is that two passenger planes full of very real people were flown into the WTC, which was full of very real people, and that the ensuing damage brought those towers and adjoining buildings down. The Deutsche Bank building which is still standing 5 years later and looks ok has to be demolished because the structural damage is irreparable.

I am not so sure about what happened at the Pentagon because something doesnt seem right there, however there is a whole plane load of people including a congressmans wife who disapeared after reporting being hijacked.

I have always thought that UA93 was shot down but tapes released last week from the joint US / Canadian NORAD team indicate that permission to shoot was refused until 15 mins after UA93 went down.

So...entertaining and thought provoking yes, but evidence....not very much at all, if any really.

Just to explode some to explode some of the other myths as well.

There were no Jews at work that day. Rubbish I knew some of the ones who were killed.
The planes were remote controlled. So who were all the people on board then, and how much were their families payed to keep quiet?
Bush planned it - He had only been President for a few months so how did he get the entire U.S secret service to set such a big operation up so quickly? The planning for this would have taken years so if the president was behind it, then it could only have been Clinton.
Bin Laden works for the U.S - And Elvis works in the local chip shop
WTC 7 was blown up - Or could it have collapsed because the two largest buildings in the world had recently fallen down next to it and caused some structural damage? Dont forget the DB building still has to come down and that just looks like it has broken windows.
The towers could not have collasped through heat alone. - The buildings had an unusual exo skeleton construction which placed the strength of the building in the corners. Any concentration of heat in those corners would cause the external structure to twist slightly and therefore drop the floors through and start a chain reaction. This is what happened and the noise of the intial floors going would have sounded like large bangs.

P.S with respect a video clip off the internet isnt going to show a lay person anything unusual at all, unless you are an expert with vast experience of watching buildings come down. Videos and phots can also be altered as has been shown by the photo journalist just suspended by Reuters because he was caught faking photos to show Israeli air attacks in a worse light.

PPS I was about to reply to Trevor and then saw some of the questions you have posed which refer to conservatives as being Nazis, Neocons as Facist Pigs, and God as a Murderer. Something tells me that you will have an entrenched position of some kind!!

Answer 3

Take a close look at the 5 frames of film released by the United States government of what hit the Pentagon. You will clearly see there was NO WAY it was an airplane. I have watched it multiple times and it looks an awful lot like a cruise missle to me.

PS snowy, you should look into Steven Jones, he and many other scholars and professors have presented evidence that totally obliturates your statement about "experts." www.st911.org

Answer 4

Take a CLOSE LOOK at the collapse of WTC7. Listen to Larry Silverstein say 'pull it'. Look at the massive inconsistencies in the official story (Bush stayed in the classroom, for nearly half an hour, against secret service protocol, so as not to 'alarm the kids', whose lives he was endangering by being there). Look at the huge cover up (threatening to arrest firefighters who took photos at ground zero, exporting and recycling all the steel without investigation).
Something reeks people. Wake up and smell the cordite.

Answer 5

if you are on about the theories that i have read about, then yes i do believe them, i know 2 planes crashed into the towers but all the scientific and engineering technology points out that them alone could not have made the towers collapse the way they did, i found alot of good stuff about this on dumpalink site, some of the videos on there last around 40 mins but if you are interested in what really happened i would watch them

Answer 6

I don't know what alternative explanation you are referring to, but if you mean the one where America caused the attack so the people would hate the middle east i find it unlikely. The terrorists attacked the pentagon as well on the same day but people often forget that because the attack on the world trade centre was so much more devastating. If it was a conspiracy by the government they would not have attacked the pentagon as well.

Answer 7

11th of September, 2001 substitute right into a shiny, crisp morning in lots of areas of america, which substitute into shattered while the country substitute into attacked by applying terrorists. individuals and acquaintances around the international remember the place they have been and what they have been doing that fateful Tuesday morning, while the 1st attack started with a airplane being flown into the international commerce center in long island.

Answer 8

Ya. It was just a coincidence that the airplanes hit the buildings. There is video evidence showing George and Jeb planting bombs in the WTC.
Then, there is some video of George reaching into his pocket and pushing the detonator switch.

Answer 9

yes, the towers are still there. The whole thing was a fake, just like the moon landings and staged using holograms and special FX. yesterday I saw a flying pig and I also found out the Earth is flat.

Answer 10

If by "they" you mean terrorists... their "evidence" is somewhat precluded by the real time video news footage of the planes crashing and the ultimate collapse of the buildings. Did you have to be taught stupidity or were you born English?