It's September 2018 - now 17 years since that horrific day - and still the events remain debatable.
Debunkers and conspiracy theorists still go head to head.
I don't fall in either category, but I do have my mind open to all sorts of theories since the official account is sketchy.

Debunkers, on the other hand, are aggressive when it comes to defending the official story.
It's almost like they have been programmed to do so.
Truth Researchers (or Truthers), like myself, and Conspiracy Theorists can make claims calmly and love a good debate.

 

All I want is to know the truth and nothing but the truth.
I want to know how it happened. Every little detail.
I'm exceptionally curious about many things that catch my interest. It's called "Da Vinci Syndrome".
Every person has a natural level of curiosity, but there are those of us who can't stop searching for answers.
"How does this work?" "How did that happen?" "Why is this made in this colour?"

However this is something that the debunkers don't care about. They have become indoctrinated by the official story and protect it like is was their favourite flag. Their minds cannot be changed in even the slightest way.
It's almost as if they fear any thoughts of a possible conspiracy, or the smallest possibility of a malfunctioning intelligence apparatus.

 

I haven't commited my mind to the official story since that horrible day, because some things didn't make sense.
I saw the first tower bellowing smoke and had no idea what had happened until I turned to CNN and they reported that a small plane had crashed into the north tower. Just from the damage of the tower I immediately came to the conclusion that it couldn't have been a 'small plane'. And then suddenly a mid-sized airliner came into view and flew a course at high speed towards the south tower. And it struck.
It took my mind no more than 3 seconds to realize that this plane deliberately flew into that building.
And if that one did, then the first one wasn't an accident either. And most likely the same size aicraft as the second one.

I came to the realization that this was a horrific attack of immense proportions.
Not once have I even considered the possibility of an 'inside job'.
How could I?

I find it difficult to fathom that a "western" government would murder thousands of its own civilians.
These things happen in third world countries, and countries led by a military regime - or by a dictator.
In those cases we call the deaths of thousands of civilians 'genocide'.
If the American government was indeed involved with the attacks on 9/11 ... do we call their deaths 'genocide' too?
If so, has the American government secretly and suddenly been transformed into a military regime?
Some would say 'yes'.
Others would say 'hogwash'.
I have no answer, because I don't believe the American government was involved with 9/11.

​

HOWEVER ....

​

I have no explanation as to WHY they seem to cover things up as much as they do.
Certainly that gives people reasons to suspect complicity?
Why not share more images of the Pentagon attack? Why feed us this bogus story that only five frames are available?
Five frames from a total of 86 cameras? How stupid do they think we are?
Well the debunkers might fall into that category, because they just say "Yes, there are only five frames available because the government said so." I guess we don't need to speculate where some of these debunkers, like Popular Mechanics, get their funding. 
In later years two more frames from one of the other security cameras was released but it showed nothing special.
So why hide it from the public all this time?

Some would say the government is covering things up because they don't want the American people to find out they inadvertently let several of the hijackers into the country while they were on watchlists, and while several of them (two that we know of for certain) were being tracked by the CIA for a full year - traveling between Malaysia and Pakistan before settling into a nice suburban home in California.

This is the sort of thing conspiracy theorists swoon over.
I just want to know if it's true, since these claims made their way into American newspapers and tv news, giving people something to speculate about. And then people like Ben Affleck and Charlie Sheen started using their celebrity status to get on the air and share what THEY think. These two idiots have really given the serious researchers a bad rep.

Back to the day in question ...
When reports surfaced that a possible third aircraft had been hijacked and making its way towards Washington DC, my first thought was "White House". Oddly enough I never thought the Pentagon would be the target.
I also never gave any thought to the Capitol building.

But then that's because I never expected a non-responsive aircraft traveling at a high speed to get anywhere near the nation's capital without being stopped somehow.

As soon as the first images of the Pentagon appeared on CNN, it struck me as strange that the impacts of the WTC and the Pentagon were so different.
WTC-1 left a huge black 'cut-out', WTC-2 left a smokeless 'cut-out', and the Pentagon left a hole that was too small for an aircraft of that size. Things really weren't adding up.

Then the first reports of the fourth plane came in and all we saw was a small crater in the ground and very little debris. It was almost like the first two strikes were perfectly planned to the most minute detail, and the last two strikes were done on the fly.
We know now that United 93 never made it to its intended target (White House, Capitol building or Camp David), but I really expected a much larger debris field from a Boeing 767. It was at this point that I began to question a few things.

Some things just didn't make sense. Didn't add up.
Then came the weirdest thing of all; the fall of WTC-7.
It came down in the exact same way as buildings #1 and #2, and that just wasn't possible because this building did not get struck by any airplanes, so it never had similar damage. It got struck by some debris from the Twin Towers as they fell and some of the floors caught fire. But it wasn't damaged enough to fall down like that. Not like that!
Like Kathy McGrade (B.S. Metallurgical Engineering) said: "The symmetry is the smoking gun. It cannot happen that when you have asymmetric damage, you will get a perfectly symmetrical collapse."

So I began further research.

Over the years I've read and heard all the possible theories on how the event must have taken place.
I agree some of these theories are very far-fetched.
One of them is the weather manipulation theory caused by a top secret Direct Energy Weapon built into something that may look like an ordinary satellite. In this theory some claim that the World Trade Center towers were weakened by an electro magnetic pulse or a high-
powered laserbeam naked to the eye the night before and the morning of the event.
Some of these theorists believe that the proof of this lies in the storm the night before and how it dissipated sooner than the weather forecast projected. A hurricane was said to make landfall on the morning of 9/11 and go as far inland as New Jersey, but instead headed out to sea. So what they are claiming is that buildings 1,2, and 7 were targeted by this DEW.
A similar group of people say the proof this weapon exists, works, and was used on these buildings, can be found in the fact that cars parked inside the garages of these buildings exploded before the planes hit.

 

EMT Michael D'Angelo states: "I remember too, the cars started to explode inside the parking lot. I mean, the cars started cooking off, they started going off, boom, boom, boom, boom. I remember that."

​

This shouldn't be confused with 'secondary explosions', or the explosions that firefighters heard while still inside the towers as they came down. And just because an EMT made such a statement doesn't necessarily make it the truth.

It's a nice theory, but it's very difficult to prove these explosions occured due to such a weapon.
That cars exploded inside these garages before the impacts is a fact. There was a rather large explosion under at least one of the twin towers just seconds before the first plane hit. The audio fragment recorded by Ginny Carr is irrefutable proof of this.
In which garage exactly this explosion took place at that time is unknown, but I would suspect it happened in the first one, but that the timing was a bit off. It weakened the lower structures to such a degree that it helped the building fall, but much later than perhaps
intended. Remember images of the diagonally cut beams on the United 175 page?
Have you ever asked yourself how this happened without anyone noticing?
I'd say the primary explosion not only weakened the base of the building, but also provided one heck of a cover for the possibility of thermite (or thermate) to be used on the beams.

Now, this doesn't mean it's an 'inside' job, as most CT-ers like to believe.
What it means is that we need to look beyond the planes for more clues as to how these buildings came down.
The planes didn't bring them down. We know that for a fact. This was a very elaborate scheme.
But this doesn't mean that there were NO PLANES. I absolutely believe what I saw.
That wasn't CGI. That wasn't a holographic projection.
The no-planers stand fast when it comes to this part of the debate.
"Aluminum can't cut steel" is their answer. True. It can't. Not under normal circumstances, as I've explained on a previous page.

But there was a lot of construction going on inside both towers in the months leading up to the 9/11 event.
ACE Elevators was conducting a full upgrade to all elevators. During this period it would not have been difficult to have unauthorized people dressed as construction workers enter certain areas and plant explosives.

​

Some of the WTC office workers complained that the noise from the contruction was too loud. Floors and walls shook by whatever was being done. Some said they heard the sound of steel being moved across the floor, like an old-fashioned trolley.

But no one knows for sure what they heard.

Both American 11 and United 175 left those strange 'cut-outs' during their respective impacts.
Both planes managed to penetrate the outer steel support beams entirely.
Had they tried this 30 floors lower, the steel would have been much thicker and the planes might not have entered all the way.

It wouldn't have been too difficult to access the original building schematics and anyone with an education in the fields of architecture or physics would be able to interpret the original building plans. So they would know where to strike to make the most damage.

The no-planers need to talk to some of the WTC survivors who saw the planes before they impacted and see how they react when they're told that no airplanes hit the towers.
Start with a man by the name of Brian Clarke, because he saw United 175 coming at him and impact the building just two floors beneath him as he sat at his desk in the south tower.

What the truth is exactly we might not ever know since Ground Zero was removed so swiftly.
It was obvious Mayor Guliani was under strict orders to have as much debris hauled away as fast as possible.
But this was LESS than 24 hours after the towers collapsed. LESS than 24 hours after the planes hit.
Did anyone stop to think that MAYBE there were still some survivors under what little rubble there was?
Did anyone stop to think that this was an active crime scene and that they were destroying evidence?
Did anyone stop to think that they were tossing away bodyparts?

A team of law enforcement and medical officials, as well as volunteers, were charged with meticulously sifting through the pile of hauled off debris. They recovered bone fragments and small pieces of bodyparts, as well as other items.

 

One thing that did not go unnoticed was that buildings 1 and 2, ie. the Twin Towers, came down exactly the same way. They didn't topple in different directions, one didn't pancake while the other toppled, one didn't come downin its entirety while the other broke in half.

No, they both pancaked with the exact same freefall speed!
The buildings were struck at different floors from different angles.
Again I'll quote Kathy McGrade: "The symmetry is the smoking gun. It cannot happen that when you have asymmetric damage, you will get a perfectly symmetrical collapse."

Physics doesn't allow both buildings to come down the same way if they've been hit differently.
The top of WTC-2 began to topple, and for a second everyone must have thought it would just fall to the ground.
But it didn't. Because suddenly the entire building began to push down into itself. It was so weird to see.

​

The way the buildings came down had every design of a controlled demolition, it had the accompanying sounds of a controlled demolition, and there were even explosives set at the base of the towers to ensure the foundation would be weak enough.

Then came NIST, who suddenly began to tell the media that there were no explosives used in any of the buildings.

This was strange, because no one had even made that assumption at that point!
NIST had unintentionally given people something to speculate about. I sometimes wonder if they did that on purpose.

Shyam Sunder then went on the air and stated that no one had ever heard any explosions anywhere in the WTC area that day.

No one except 118 firefighters, dozens of cops, several hundred bystanders, and the media with cameras and mics.
And then one day ... NIST made an animation of how WTC-7 collapsed.
That's to say how THEY felt it collapsed. "It started with colomn # 79 and then the building buckled inward."
Sure, and it was Santa Claus who landed on the roof a few months too early and made the penthouse topple.

This free fall phenomenon that took place was allowed to happen due to lack of friction.
The tops of the buildings followed the path of least resistance as they went down.
Normally it would fall and STOP, because that's how the buildings were designed. 
I like to think that's how most buildings are designed.
But somehow the floors under the impact zone had a flaw in their designs. A flaw we're not being told of.
How else can we explain the way these two towers pancaked all the way down, without anything in their way?
I should say THREE towers, since it was building 7 that ultimately woke most of us up.
Had WTC-7 not fallen that day, I think most of us wouldn't have thought twice about how WTC-1 and WTC-2 came down.

On Sept. 10th, yes ... the very day before the attacks, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld gave an interview on national television that, at first, seemed less shocking than it does today.
On Sept. 12th some people suddenly remembered a part of that interview and began to put 2 and 2 together.

Like with the stock markets in the days leading up to 9/11, the Rumsfeld interview smelled of foreknowledge.

His startling words "Pentagon Bureaucracy" couldn't have come at a worse time.
On January 11 of the same year, Rumsfeld was seen on C-Span during the Defense Secretary Confirmation Hearing when he was asked by Sen. Robert Byrd why the Pentagon asked for an increase of 50 billion dollars to their budget when they couldn't even account for a missing 2.3 trillion dollars. This money was apparently spent on various transactions in just one year, but the DoD auditors couldn't verify it. When asked what he would do about this problem, Rumsfeld laughingly answered "Decline the nomination."

After 9/11, speculation arose that the area of the Pentagon where the impact occured housed the only computer in the country that showed where that money actually went. That it was the only computer that had any evidence at all of those dubious transactions.

 

In September 2000, a slightly startling paper was released called:

 

                                America's Defenses - Strategy, Forces, and Resources For a New Century

 

                                                   The Project for the New American Century

Besides the very creepy title and name of the foundation, one of the passages from this paper reads as follows:

"And advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biologcal warfare from the realm of terror to a politically usefull tool."

The Project for the New American Century was founded in 1997 with the idea to project American global dominance into the 21st century. Members of this foundation later became members of the Bush administration - among them Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, and Paul Wolfowitz. Conspiracy theorists went wild when they learned of this and began to call this organization, and The White House, the First Steps towards a New World Order.

But rebuilding the military and upgrading the defenses would not happen unless a defining act against America would take place.

As the above paper suggests:

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary changes, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor."

And then on the morning of September 11, 2001, America came under attack at the exact moment its national defenses were dialed down for a massive strategic simulation. Were conspiracy theorists right this time?

Some might dare to argue that part of the missing money could have gone to the families of the 'terrorists' as areward of sorts, others would suggest that it was used to finance the entire operation from start to finish.

In either case, the above information stands out in such a way that it begs further investigation, despite the 9/11 Commission Report stating: "The U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Utimately the question is of little practical significance."

[source 9/11 Trillions: Follow The Money - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3xgjxJwedA]

​

Additional information regarding united Airlines flight 93:

What many might not know was that airplane debris was found in Indian Lake and just outside the town of New Baltimore, PA.
It was quickly determined that this debris had to have been part of United Airlines flight #93.
This information was protected from mainstream media until a few years ago.
It was always assumed that flight #93 crashed in one piece, but this was always difficult to explain since the aircraft was in a steep nosedive from 33.000 feet, at an inverted 30 degree negative angle.
It made sense to many that the aircraft would have broken up at that angle and airspeed, but according to the FBI, the NTSB, and their released statements, the entire aircraft in question impacted the ground.
We know now that this is not true and never was.
Why did the authorities try to hide the fact that the aircraft began to break up in mid air when it's perfectly normal behavior for an aircraft to break apart when it is forced to travel at speeds exceeding its maximum level of tolerance?

Some however believe the airplane was shot out of the sky, and that the debris found at the above mentioned locations was from the impact of the missile. Perhaps we'll never know the truth about this crash.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in3vlyia8H4

Additional Sept. 11 flights that had possible hijackers

United Airlines Flight 23 from JFK to LAX was one of possibly six flights that was going to be hijacked and crashed into whatever target was allotted for it. But when the FAA cancelled all takeoffs and ordered all airborne flights to land immediately, it became clear that the 9/11 attacks could have been even bigger than they eventually were.
ATC told all flightcrews to secure their cockpit doors to reduce the possibility of hijacking In lieu of recent events.

Three Middle Eastern men aboard United Airlines flight #23 apparently became upset and elluded airport security as they deboarded the plane in a hurry. In the carry-on on luggage they left behind security personell found boxcutters and documents in Arabic.
To date, United Airlines flight #23 is the only 'other' airplane of which we are certain it would have undergone the same fates as AA #11, UA #175, AA #77, and UA #93.

Ie. hijacked and used as missiles.

And on September 13, TWO DAYS after the events in New York and Washington, more suspicious people were detained at La Guardia and JFK airports in New York. Some of these individuals had fake pilot's licences on them (!), others had tickets dated 9/11 on them, and others had 'crew' bags. All of these men were Saudi nationals.
It would appear from these arrests that it wasn't quite over and that the 'operators' of the flights that were cancelled on the 11th were eager to try again. Alas now airport security and FBI were ready for them.
It later became known that fake pilot ID's had been used by some of the above individuals, others were red flagged by INS and taken into custody by the FBI for questioning.

On September 14, American Airlines flight #133 bound to take off from La Guardia to LAX, which was already delayed by three hours, was boarded by a heavily armed SWAT or FBI team. This team took three or four inviduals into custody.

It appeared as if another tragedy had been thwarted and that airport security had finally been sufficiently upgraded.

Since that day there have been no more such incidents reported.

​

​