Why is the Government Blamed for the Conspiracy of 9/11?
The terrorist attacks of 9/11 shocked the United States of America and made many question who would terrorize American citizens and who could let this happen. Many conspiracy theories started rising, the most popular was that regarding the government's involvement. This conspiracy theory grew because it revolved around a well organized secretive organization which is involved in many covert operations, that being our Government. . With a large group of people growing increasingly skeptical of the United States government, they formed hypotheses and looked for evidence to support their theories, while discrediting everything that went against their evidence. This evidence for the most part are facts that are not explained, fabricated, or taken out of context.
What Areas of the Government are Associated with the Conspiracy by the Truthers and why?
The mainstream 9/11 conspiracy theory focuses on the government and Larry Silverstein who was the owner of the Twin Towers. At the pinnacle of this conspiracy theory is the highest levels of the executive branch of the United States Government during 2001. This includes the Bush administration, the CIA, and the FBI.
Controlled Demoltion
One of the most convincing conspiracy theories is the controlled demolition. People don't believe that a plane could take down the towers, so they claimed to have found a more reliable reason why the towers came down.
Theoligan David Ray states, “It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government.” He, like many other theologians, don't understand how a building that was supposed to handle the impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds couldn't withstand the 9/11 crash. Along with that, there was a volcanic-like dust cloud that came off the building, which supposedly only bombs are capable of making this. Therefore, he is convinced that bombs were used to take down the World Trade Center buildings.
Another theorist, Alex Jones, has the same beliefs as Griffin. There is only one thing that he includes into his theory that is different than other theorists. He claims that the planes were used intentionally, as a tactic. The planes were a way to guide peoples attention toward the planes rather than the "actual" cause. It seems especially planned to Jones because whenever a plane gets off track, the Air Traffic Controller requests for interception from the millitary. For some reason 9/11 was the only time that this didn't happen. When the planes were finally sent to intercept, they were sent from Falmouth, Massachusettes rather than an area closer by Ft. Dix or Laguardia. This makes the attack seem more planned to him and as if the government did know what was about to happen.
Theoligan David Ray states, “It is already possible to know, beyond a reasonable doubt, one very important thing: the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job, orchestrated by terrorists within our own government.” He, like many other theologians, don't understand how a building that was supposed to handle the impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds couldn't withstand the 9/11 crash. Along with that, there was a volcanic-like dust cloud that came off the building, which supposedly only bombs are capable of making this. Therefore, he is convinced that bombs were used to take down the World Trade Center buildings.
Another theorist, Alex Jones, has the same beliefs as Griffin. There is only one thing that he includes into his theory that is different than other theorists. He claims that the planes were used intentionally, as a tactic. The planes were a way to guide peoples attention toward the planes rather than the "actual" cause. It seems especially planned to Jones because whenever a plane gets off track, the Air Traffic Controller requests for interception from the millitary. For some reason 9/11 was the only time that this didn't happen. When the planes were finally sent to intercept, they were sent from Falmouth, Massachusettes rather than an area closer by Ft. Dix or Laguardia. This makes the attack seem more planned to him and as if the government did know what was about to happen.
TRUTH
The truth is, there were no signs of bombs or inside work by the government. The reason the building fell is explained fully through two credible scientists, Thomas W. Eager and Christopher Musso.
9/11 was a sunny day that was encountering hardly any wind. This means there was barely any stress on the building. Due to this, the building was able to withstand the initial impact of the airplane. After the plane hit, it released 90,000 L gallons of jet fuel which created a fire. The fire has been one of the most misunderstood parts of the tragedy. It is believed that the steel melted because the jet fuels burn extremely hot, this is not true. There is a difference between heat and temperature. Heat is related to the temperature through the heat capacity and the density whereas temperature doesn't vary with the quantity of material and heat does. The fire created by the plane wasn't unusual and the temperature of it was normal as well but it wasn't capable of melting steel.
In order to melt steel the temperature, at it's lowest, would have to be 1500 degrees C, and even at this temperature it is still hard to melt the steel. The estimated temperature of the jet fuel mixed with air is about 1000 degrees C at it's hottest point but by the time it reached the steel, scientists explain that the hottest the fire could have been at that point is between 750-800 degrees C.
The fire did create stress for the steel because at around 425 degress C the steel will begin to soften and at around 650 degrees C half of the steel's strength will decrease by around 50%. Even with this loss, the steel can still hold up. The other stress came from the uneven distribution of the fire. The fire wasn't the same throughout the entire building and the outside of the box columns was experiencing a lower temperature than the side facing the fire. By having these differences, it creates a residual stress which then leads into buckling failures. By having both factors present, loss of strength from the fire and loss of structural integrity from distortion of steel, it creates total failure to the steel.
The building might have been able to withstand one falling column, but when multiple floors began to collapse it overstressed the other floors and that created a dominoe effect collapse. For the floors above where the plane collapsed, they came down because as the joists from a couple of the heavily burned floors came down, the outer box columns bowed outward which made the upper floors collapse. By this point, the floors below were now holding 45,000t and the design capacity for each floor to hold was 1,300t. Therefore, the floors below had no chance of holding up 45,000t and as the weight continued to increase, the building began to collapse at an even faster rate. This is why we witness the building falling so fast.
People still question why the building wouldn't have just fallen over onto other buildings, but a building that contains 500,000t has way too much inertia to fall in another direction other than straight down. It wasn't because the fire melted the steel. It also wasn't the bombs because the building would have fallen at a faster rate.
The truth is, there were no signs of bombs or inside work by the government. The reason the building fell is explained fully through two credible scientists, Thomas W. Eager and Christopher Musso.
9/11 was a sunny day that was encountering hardly any wind. This means there was barely any stress on the building. Due to this, the building was able to withstand the initial impact of the airplane. After the plane hit, it released 90,000 L gallons of jet fuel which created a fire. The fire has been one of the most misunderstood parts of the tragedy. It is believed that the steel melted because the jet fuels burn extremely hot, this is not true. There is a difference between heat and temperature. Heat is related to the temperature through the heat capacity and the density whereas temperature doesn't vary with the quantity of material and heat does. The fire created by the plane wasn't unusual and the temperature of it was normal as well but it wasn't capable of melting steel.
In order to melt steel the temperature, at it's lowest, would have to be 1500 degrees C, and even at this temperature it is still hard to melt the steel. The estimated temperature of the jet fuel mixed with air is about 1000 degrees C at it's hottest point but by the time it reached the steel, scientists explain that the hottest the fire could have been at that point is between 750-800 degrees C.
The fire did create stress for the steel because at around 425 degress C the steel will begin to soften and at around 650 degrees C half of the steel's strength will decrease by around 50%. Even with this loss, the steel can still hold up. The other stress came from the uneven distribution of the fire. The fire wasn't the same throughout the entire building and the outside of the box columns was experiencing a lower temperature than the side facing the fire. By having these differences, it creates a residual stress which then leads into buckling failures. By having both factors present, loss of strength from the fire and loss of structural integrity from distortion of steel, it creates total failure to the steel.
The building might have been able to withstand one falling column, but when multiple floors began to collapse it overstressed the other floors and that created a dominoe effect collapse. For the floors above where the plane collapsed, they came down because as the joists from a couple of the heavily burned floors came down, the outer box columns bowed outward which made the upper floors collapse. By this point, the floors below were now holding 45,000t and the design capacity for each floor to hold was 1,300t. Therefore, the floors below had no chance of holding up 45,000t and as the weight continued to increase, the building began to collapse at an even faster rate. This is why we witness the building falling so fast.
People still question why the building wouldn't have just fallen over onto other buildings, but a building that contains 500,000t has way too much inertia to fall in another direction other than straight down. It wasn't because the fire melted the steel. It also wasn't the bombs because the building would have fallen at a faster rate.
Dick Cheney
Truther Evidence
Dick Cheney was the vice president during the terroristic attacks of 9/11 and is often referred to as the mastermind and leader behind the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. He is accused of using his authority to paralyze the Air Force, thereby allowing Al Qaeda to proceed with their plans to use airliners as weapons. This evidence comes from the testimony that Norman Mineta gave claiming that Dick Cheney gave some sort of order not to shoot down the plane that was fast approaching its target. Mineta claimed that as the plane was coming in, "There was a young man who had come in to say to the Vice President, 'The plane is plane is fifty miles out, the plane is thirty miles out', and when the plane was ten miles out the young man turned to the Vice President and asked, 'Do the orders still stand?' and the Vice President turned, whipped his neck around and said, 'Of course the orders still stand'". Based on this testimony, many of the 9/11 truthers are convinced that Dick Cheney must have been giving the order to not let the Air Force shoot down the plane that was on its way to terrorize the Pentagon. Furthermore, Richard Clarke writes in his book, "Against All Enemies", Cheney was giving orders from Bush very quickly from the Presidential bunker. Overall, truthers claim that Dick Cheney used his vice presidential power to freeze the Air Force from shooting down the plane that was used to crash into the Pentagon and kill innocent Americans.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling You.
According to the Constitution, the Vice President of the United States of America's only political power is to vote in Senate when it is necessary to break a tie. Aside from that, the Vice President's power only comes when the President has died, resigned from office, or been removed from office. Given that none of these circumstances were in place on September 11, 2001, the Vice President did not have power over any branch of the Military. Therefore, Cheney did not have the power to paralyze the Air Force. Even if Cheney did have the power to give military commands, the United States does not shoot down civilian aircraft and if the government did this, they would be fulfilling the goals of the terrorist organizations that seek to harm Americans. The testimony is also anecdotal evidence, which relies on the memory and word of one man against the word of another without any physical evidence, making it unreliable. Other sources also claim that Cheney was involved based on the large amount of orders in the Presidential Bunker, but these orders came from the President, implying that the President was the one in charge of what was happening in the bunker, not Cheney.
Dick Cheney was the vice president during the terroristic attacks of 9/11 and is often referred to as the mastermind and leader behind the attacks on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. He is accused of using his authority to paralyze the Air Force, thereby allowing Al Qaeda to proceed with their plans to use airliners as weapons. This evidence comes from the testimony that Norman Mineta gave claiming that Dick Cheney gave some sort of order not to shoot down the plane that was fast approaching its target. Mineta claimed that as the plane was coming in, "There was a young man who had come in to say to the Vice President, 'The plane is plane is fifty miles out, the plane is thirty miles out', and when the plane was ten miles out the young man turned to the Vice President and asked, 'Do the orders still stand?' and the Vice President turned, whipped his neck around and said, 'Of course the orders still stand'". Based on this testimony, many of the 9/11 truthers are convinced that Dick Cheney must have been giving the order to not let the Air Force shoot down the plane that was on its way to terrorize the Pentagon. Furthermore, Richard Clarke writes in his book, "Against All Enemies", Cheney was giving orders from Bush very quickly from the Presidential bunker. Overall, truthers claim that Dick Cheney used his vice presidential power to freeze the Air Force from shooting down the plane that was used to crash into the Pentagon and kill innocent Americans.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling You.
According to the Constitution, the Vice President of the United States of America's only political power is to vote in Senate when it is necessary to break a tie. Aside from that, the Vice President's power only comes when the President has died, resigned from office, or been removed from office. Given that none of these circumstances were in place on September 11, 2001, the Vice President did not have power over any branch of the Military. Therefore, Cheney did not have the power to paralyze the Air Force. Even if Cheney did have the power to give military commands, the United States does not shoot down civilian aircraft and if the government did this, they would be fulfilling the goals of the terrorist organizations that seek to harm Americans. The testimony is also anecdotal evidence, which relies on the memory and word of one man against the word of another without any physical evidence, making it unreliable. Other sources also claim that Cheney was involved based on the large amount of orders in the Presidential Bunker, but these orders came from the President, implying that the President was the one in charge of what was happening in the bunker, not Cheney.
Condoleezza Rice
Truther Evidence
Condoleezza Rice was the national security advisor during the Bush Administration and is often blamed for having extensive knowledge of the terrorist attacks before they happened. She is also accused of purposefully hiding facts that would otherwise stop 9/11. In July 2001, the CIA Director George J. Tenet reviewed the CIA intelligence that indicated an increasing likelihood that the Al Qaeda would soon attack the United States. This evidence was a large sum of fragments that showed an increase in activity in Al Qaeda. Tenet pressed Rice to set a clear counterterrorism policy by giving the CIA more power to conduct covert actions. The ex-CIA director did not know what Al Qaeda was planning, how they planned to do it, or when they were to execute their plans, he said that, "It's my sixth sense, but I feel it coming, this is going to be the big one". Despite this warning, Rice did not prevent 9/11 or, according to them, acted as though it was not a huge concern. Another point that the 9/11 Truth Movement uses as evidence against Rice is the fact that she did not not testify under oath in a public panel.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling You.
Though the Truthers seem make points and raise questions there are explanations to their accusations. Though there was a spike in intelligence intercepted from terrorist organizations, the data lacked any conclusive evidence regarding the details of a terrorist attack. It only indicated that there may be a future attack on U.S. interests or on the U.S homeland. It did not specify as to where, when, or how in the United States or its interests were going to be attacked. Though many articles claim that Rice kept this knowledge from President Bush, Rice did inform Bush of the vague data and Bush said that "I don't want to swat at flies". Truthers also make a point by questioning Rice's appearance in a public testimony under oath. The 9/11 Truth Movement often asks what has Condoleezza Rice have to hide from the public? Being the security advisor, Dr. Rice is most likely exposed to classified information that could have a detrimental effect on the national security of the United States if revealed publicly. It is also a principle that security advisors and presidential staff do not testify before congress. This being the case, it is not out of the ordinary for any of the presidential staff and security advisors to not appear before Congress. Though Dr. Rice did not appear publicly, Rice still was interviewed by the 9/11 Commission in private for four hours accounting the events of 9/11. Overall, there was no conclusive evidence regarding when, where, how, and from where Al Qaeda was going to attack the United States prior to 9/11 and it was customary for a security advisor to not appear before Congress publicly and under oath.
Condoleezza Rice was the national security advisor during the Bush Administration and is often blamed for having extensive knowledge of the terrorist attacks before they happened. She is also accused of purposefully hiding facts that would otherwise stop 9/11. In July 2001, the CIA Director George J. Tenet reviewed the CIA intelligence that indicated an increasing likelihood that the Al Qaeda would soon attack the United States. This evidence was a large sum of fragments that showed an increase in activity in Al Qaeda. Tenet pressed Rice to set a clear counterterrorism policy by giving the CIA more power to conduct covert actions. The ex-CIA director did not know what Al Qaeda was planning, how they planned to do it, or when they were to execute their plans, he said that, "It's my sixth sense, but I feel it coming, this is going to be the big one". Despite this warning, Rice did not prevent 9/11 or, according to them, acted as though it was not a huge concern. Another point that the 9/11 Truth Movement uses as evidence against Rice is the fact that she did not not testify under oath in a public panel.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling You.
Though the Truthers seem make points and raise questions there are explanations to their accusations. Though there was a spike in intelligence intercepted from terrorist organizations, the data lacked any conclusive evidence regarding the details of a terrorist attack. It only indicated that there may be a future attack on U.S. interests or on the U.S homeland. It did not specify as to where, when, or how in the United States or its interests were going to be attacked. Though many articles claim that Rice kept this knowledge from President Bush, Rice did inform Bush of the vague data and Bush said that "I don't want to swat at flies". Truthers also make a point by questioning Rice's appearance in a public testimony under oath. The 9/11 Truth Movement often asks what has Condoleezza Rice have to hide from the public? Being the security advisor, Dr. Rice is most likely exposed to classified information that could have a detrimental effect on the national security of the United States if revealed publicly. It is also a principle that security advisors and presidential staff do not testify before congress. This being the case, it is not out of the ordinary for any of the presidential staff and security advisors to not appear before Congress. Though Dr. Rice did not appear publicly, Rice still was interviewed by the 9/11 Commission in private for four hours accounting the events of 9/11. Overall, there was no conclusive evidence regarding when, where, how, and from where Al Qaeda was going to attack the United States prior to 9/11 and it was customary for a security advisor to not appear before Congress publicly and under oath.
George w. Bush
Truther Evidence
George W. Bush was the president during the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Because of his former political position, he has a role in the popular government conspiracy theory of 9/11. He is accused of organizing, overseeing, allowing the terrorist attacks to happen. These accusations come from statements Bush has made, people he has met with, and his ambition to invade Iraq. One example of truther evidence comes from the his statements made shortly after 9/11 when he was questioned about how he felt when he saw the first plane hit the tower. He stated, "I had seen this plane fly into the first building, there was a T.V. set on" when there was no live coverage of the first plane hitting the tower. Questions also arose about a meeting that he had with a convicted terrorist fundraiser before 9/11. This man, Abduahman Alamoudi, was sentenced to 23 years in prison for illegal terrorist fundraising, and illegal dealings with Libya to assassinate the Saudi Prince. Furthermore, he had intentions to go to war with Iraq prior to 9/11 and after he quickly tried to tie Al Qaeda to Iraq in order to get public support invade. Through these facts, truthers believe that George W. Bush oversaw the terrorist attacks of 9/11 to seek political support in the war in Iraq.
Another theorist claims that Bush's reaction to a reporter's question of whether or not he knew about the attacks prior to them occuring was a give away that he had to have known about the tragedy. His reaction can be seen in this video that was shown live on CNN news.
George W. Bush was the president during the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Because of his former political position, he has a role in the popular government conspiracy theory of 9/11. He is accused of organizing, overseeing, allowing the terrorist attacks to happen. These accusations come from statements Bush has made, people he has met with, and his ambition to invade Iraq. One example of truther evidence comes from the his statements made shortly after 9/11 when he was questioned about how he felt when he saw the first plane hit the tower. He stated, "I had seen this plane fly into the first building, there was a T.V. set on" when there was no live coverage of the first plane hitting the tower. Questions also arose about a meeting that he had with a convicted terrorist fundraiser before 9/11. This man, Abduahman Alamoudi, was sentenced to 23 years in prison for illegal terrorist fundraising, and illegal dealings with Libya to assassinate the Saudi Prince. Furthermore, he had intentions to go to war with Iraq prior to 9/11 and after he quickly tried to tie Al Qaeda to Iraq in order to get public support invade. Through these facts, truthers believe that George W. Bush oversaw the terrorist attacks of 9/11 to seek political support in the war in Iraq.
Another theorist claims that Bush's reaction to a reporter's question of whether or not he knew about the attacks prior to them occuring was a give away that he had to have known about the tragedy. His reaction can be seen in this video that was shown live on CNN news.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling You
Many conspiracy theorists confuse hyper-competence with incompetence. In other words, they mistake a simple misunderstanding or error for a larger conspiracy plot being revealed. When Bush said, "[He] had seen this plane fly into the first building, there was a T.V. set on," he was most likely referring to the plane he saw on T.V., which was the second plane hitting the towers and made the mistake of saying it was the first. Bush had no way to see the first plane hit because he was in a grade school reading to elementary students. Truthers also claim that Bush met with a terrorist financier before the attacks, which seems very
suspicious for a President to do unless they were creating a plot for a complex terrorist attack in two years. The truthers are referring to Abdurahman Alamoudi who founded the American Muslim council. This was a lobbying group that lobbied on behalf of most American Muslims and he was also the Islamic Advisor under Bill Clinton. Alamoudi met with George W. Bush in 1999 to talk about support for the upcoming elections. It was not until 2004 that Alamoudi pleaded guilty to illegal terrorist activities and illegal procurement of citizenship. The former Islamic Advisor was described as "An Expert in the art of deception" by Newsweek journalists and agreed to cooperate in further terrorist investigations. Despite the previous facts being explained and falsified, President Bush did want to invade Iraq to look for what he thought to be weapons of mass destruction. Truthers believe this is what justified the the 9/11 attacks for Bush, but there were reasons to assume that Al Qaeda had ties to Iraq regardless of prior intentions or motives. Iraq is a growing center for recruitment and training of Al Qaeda since the Afghan-Soviet war throughout the 1980s. Iraq also is a large recruitment area for foreigners who support Al Qaeda's cause making it a likely target for the U.S. to crackdown on Al Qaeda.
Overall, President Bush mistook the second plane that crashed into the Twin Towers as the first when questioned about it, he met with an Islamic Advisor to discuss support of a large minority population, and even though he wanted to invade Iraq, there were several other reasons to tie it to the attacks of 9/11.
Many conspiracy theorists confuse hyper-competence with incompetence. In other words, they mistake a simple misunderstanding or error for a larger conspiracy plot being revealed. When Bush said, "[He] had seen this plane fly into the first building, there was a T.V. set on," he was most likely referring to the plane he saw on T.V., which was the second plane hitting the towers and made the mistake of saying it was the first. Bush had no way to see the first plane hit because he was in a grade school reading to elementary students. Truthers also claim that Bush met with a terrorist financier before the attacks, which seems very
suspicious for a President to do unless they were creating a plot for a complex terrorist attack in two years. The truthers are referring to Abdurahman Alamoudi who founded the American Muslim council. This was a lobbying group that lobbied on behalf of most American Muslims and he was also the Islamic Advisor under Bill Clinton. Alamoudi met with George W. Bush in 1999 to talk about support for the upcoming elections. It was not until 2004 that Alamoudi pleaded guilty to illegal terrorist activities and illegal procurement of citizenship. The former Islamic Advisor was described as "An Expert in the art of deception" by Newsweek journalists and agreed to cooperate in further terrorist investigations. Despite the previous facts being explained and falsified, President Bush did want to invade Iraq to look for what he thought to be weapons of mass destruction. Truthers believe this is what justified the the 9/11 attacks for Bush, but there were reasons to assume that Al Qaeda had ties to Iraq regardless of prior intentions or motives. Iraq is a growing center for recruitment and training of Al Qaeda since the Afghan-Soviet war throughout the 1980s. Iraq also is a large recruitment area for foreigners who support Al Qaeda's cause making it a likely target for the U.S. to crackdown on Al Qaeda.
Overall, President Bush mistook the second plane that crashed into the Twin Towers as the first when questioned about it, he met with an Islamic Advisor to discuss support of a large minority population, and even though he wanted to invade Iraq, there were several other reasons to tie it to the attacks of 9/11.
Karl ROve
Truther Evidence
Karl Rove was the former Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff under the Bush Administration. Rove is also accused of being apart of a government conspiracy regarding the attacks of 9/11. The 9/11 Truth community claims that he had knowledge of the plans of 9/11 based on comments made, people he met with, and his support for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The comments that Rove made that Truthers conclude are solid evidence were, "Sometimes history sends you things, and 9/11 came our way". He also supported Bush in his plans to look for non-existant weapons of mass destruction which truthers believe gave him the motive to help plan the attacks to rally public support for a war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Lastly, he accompanied George W. Bush in a meeting with Abdurahman Alamoudi in 1999 that was mentioned in the truther evidence against Bush. Truthers believe that Karl Rove was involved in the planning and execution of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 because of the comments he said regarding 9/11, his support for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and his meeting with Bush and Abdurahman Alamoudi.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling You
Karl Rove said, "Sometimes history sends you things, and 9/11 came our way", this does not mean that he was apart of the attacks at all and I do not see how this can considered evidence. If anything, he is indicating that 9/11 was a complete surprise to him. He also was involved in the meeting between himself, President Bush, and Alamoudi in 1999 that was not out of the normal because Alamoudi was the founder and leader of the American Muslim council and Islamic Advisor under President Clinton. He is also accused based on his support of Bush's policy in the Middle East. This also is not a firm piece of evidence either. There were millions of Americans that supported Bush's Middle Eastern policies and even with 9/11 the Iraqi and Afghan War were very unpopular! Overall, there is not a trace of evidence indicating that Karl Rove was at all involved in the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
Karl Rove was the former Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff under the Bush Administration. Rove is also accused of being apart of a government conspiracy regarding the attacks of 9/11. The 9/11 Truth community claims that he had knowledge of the plans of 9/11 based on comments made, people he met with, and his support for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The comments that Rove made that Truthers conclude are solid evidence were, "Sometimes history sends you things, and 9/11 came our way". He also supported Bush in his plans to look for non-existant weapons of mass destruction which truthers believe gave him the motive to help plan the attacks to rally public support for a war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Lastly, he accompanied George W. Bush in a meeting with Abdurahman Alamoudi in 1999 that was mentioned in the truther evidence against Bush. Truthers believe that Karl Rove was involved in the planning and execution of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 because of the comments he said regarding 9/11, his support for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and his meeting with Bush and Abdurahman Alamoudi.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling You
Karl Rove said, "Sometimes history sends you things, and 9/11 came our way", this does not mean that he was apart of the attacks at all and I do not see how this can considered evidence. If anything, he is indicating that 9/11 was a complete surprise to him. He also was involved in the meeting between himself, President Bush, and Alamoudi in 1999 that was not out of the normal because Alamoudi was the founder and leader of the American Muslim council and Islamic Advisor under President Clinton. He is also accused based on his support of Bush's policy in the Middle East. This also is not a firm piece of evidence either. There were millions of Americans that supported Bush's Middle Eastern policies and even with 9/11 the Iraqi and Afghan War were very unpopular! Overall, there is not a trace of evidence indicating that Karl Rove was at all involved in the terrorist attacks of 9/11.
World Trade Center 7
Larry Silverstein
Truther Evidence
Larry Silverstein held the lease on the World Center Building during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Truthers claim that Silverstein had a large involvement in 9/11 based on his comments regarding WTC building 7, his "terrorist insurance", and the possible profits that he could have made from his insurance as a direct result of the terrorist attacks. Truthers claim that WTC building 7 came down as a result of Larry Silverstein saying, "Pull it" to the Fire Chief and later that day the World Trade Center building came down. This shows that Larry Silverstein allowed the collapse of WTC building 7. Larry also invested in insurance against acts of terrorism before the attacks, and could have potentially made a huge profit off of the attacks claiming compensation for two separate terrorist attacks. The U.S. District Court in Manhattan stated that Silverstein could have made up to 4.6 billion dollars from the insurance compensation. Based on this data, the 9/11 truth community accuses Larry Silverstein of having a heavy involvement in the conspiracy of 9/11 for financial gains.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling you
Truthers claim that when Silverstein said, "pull it" to the Fire Department commander on 9/11 he was implying that was ordering the controlled demolition of WTC building 7. This means that the term "pull it" is a piece of jargon from the demolition business meaning to demolish whatever is being "pulled". This is not true, to "pull" a building in demolition refers to pulling a building away from another with cables after demolition. Silverstein also stated that he was referring to pulling the fire fighters out of building seven, in order to not put fire fighters in any unnecessary danger. He was also talking to the leader of the Fire Department, knew the fires were beyond control and that the building was coming down. Another point that the Truth Movement uses against Larry Silverstein is the fact that he had insurance against terrorist activities. An insurance policy for terrorism makes sense because the Twin Towers had been bombed in 1993 and it was clear that they were a target for terrorists. Lastly, truthers think that Larry made a huge profit off of 9/11 through insurance. This is also false. Silverstein was awarded 4.6 billion dollars for the attacks against the world trade center complex, but this was all lost to rebuilding the complex which is predicted to cost over 7 billion dollars. Overall, Silverstein's quotes were taken out of text and were based on the advice of the Fire Department Commander, he had reason to have insurance against terrorist activities, and he lost billions of dollars as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Larry Silverstein held the lease on the World Center Building during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Truthers claim that Silverstein had a large involvement in 9/11 based on his comments regarding WTC building 7, his "terrorist insurance", and the possible profits that he could have made from his insurance as a direct result of the terrorist attacks. Truthers claim that WTC building 7 came down as a result of Larry Silverstein saying, "Pull it" to the Fire Chief and later that day the World Trade Center building came down. This shows that Larry Silverstein allowed the collapse of WTC building 7. Larry also invested in insurance against acts of terrorism before the attacks, and could have potentially made a huge profit off of the attacks claiming compensation for two separate terrorist attacks. The U.S. District Court in Manhattan stated that Silverstein could have made up to 4.6 billion dollars from the insurance compensation. Based on this data, the 9/11 truth community accuses Larry Silverstein of having a heavy involvement in the conspiracy of 9/11 for financial gains.
What the Truthers Aren't Telling you
Truthers claim that when Silverstein said, "pull it" to the Fire Department commander on 9/11 he was implying that was ordering the controlled demolition of WTC building 7. This means that the term "pull it" is a piece of jargon from the demolition business meaning to demolish whatever is being "pulled". This is not true, to "pull" a building in demolition refers to pulling a building away from another with cables after demolition. Silverstein also stated that he was referring to pulling the fire fighters out of building seven, in order to not put fire fighters in any unnecessary danger. He was also talking to the leader of the Fire Department, knew the fires were beyond control and that the building was coming down. Another point that the Truth Movement uses against Larry Silverstein is the fact that he had insurance against terrorist activities. An insurance policy for terrorism makes sense because the Twin Towers had been bombed in 1993 and it was clear that they were a target for terrorists. Lastly, truthers think that Larry made a huge profit off of 9/11 through insurance. This is also false. Silverstein was awarded 4.6 billion dollars for the attacks against the world trade center complex, but this was all lost to rebuilding the complex which is predicted to cost over 7 billion dollars. Overall, Silverstein's quotes were taken out of text and were based on the advice of the Fire Department Commander, he had reason to have insurance against terrorist activities, and he lost billions of dollars as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
This conspiracy from 9/11 didn't deal with the Twin Towers, but with a building that is part of the World Trade Center Complex. Due to the fact that the buildings, WTC 3, 4, and 5, were closer to the Twin Towers, it is hard for people to understand how WTC7 came down. That is why people were easily convinced that something other than a true tragedy caused this.
There is a 6 second video that shows the collapse of the tower. Due to this video, people believe that the building fell in exactly 6 seconds. The building looks like it collapsed in that time, but there isn't other angles to show the building actually hitting the ground. Without any evidence of it hitting the ground, people are just believing a video and what people are saying rather than actual facts. There is no way to tell how long it took the building to fall because all we see is the building disappear behind another building in a matter of 6 seconds, not the amount of time it took for the entire building to hit the ground.
There is a 6 second video that shows the collapse of the tower. Due to this video, people believe that the building fell in exactly 6 seconds. The building looks like it collapsed in that time, but there isn't other angles to show the building actually hitting the ground. Without any evidence of it hitting the ground, people are just believing a video and what people are saying rather than actual facts. There is no way to tell how long it took the building to fall because all we see is the building disappear behind another building in a matter of 6 seconds, not the amount of time it took for the entire building to hit the ground.
Ryan and Andy are two theorists who, like many other people, believe that a controlled demolition took down WTC7. They are confused on how a building can fall without any impact. They list some reasons why it had to be a controlled demolition:
- Rapid onset of collapse
- There was an explosive sound at ground level before the building destructed
- Collapsed completely into its own footprint
- Massive pyroclastic-like clouds
- Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional
- Foreknowledge of collapse
And these theorists also list why they are convinced it couldn't have been a fire:
- No slow onset with large visible deformation
- Asymmetrical collapse that falls within itself
- Evidence of fire temperature softening the steel
- High-rise buildings have dealt with larger, hotter, and longer fires that didn't create a collapse.
These points are just ideas that they thought seemed logical, before ever looking into facts about WTC 7 and what truly caused it to fall.
- Rapid onset of collapse
- There was an explosive sound at ground level before the building destructed
- Collapsed completely into its own footprint
- Massive pyroclastic-like clouds
- Expert corroboration from the top European controlled demolition professional
- Foreknowledge of collapse
And these theorists also list why they are convinced it couldn't have been a fire:
- No slow onset with large visible deformation
- Asymmetrical collapse that falls within itself
- Evidence of fire temperature softening the steel
- High-rise buildings have dealt with larger, hotter, and longer fires that didn't create a collapse.
These points are just ideas that they thought seemed logical, before ever looking into facts about WTC 7 and what truly caused it to fall.
TRUTH
The other buildings surrounding the Twin Towers were also affected by the collapse but they didn't catch on fire like WTC 7 did. The difference is that WTC 7 is much higher than the other buildings which made it more prone to disaster from the first collapses. Since the other buildings are much shorter they didn't have to deal with the heavy load of the stories in the building.
When it's said that they have to "pull" down a building, they are talking about building 6. In all the videos, there is never pure evidence of how they end up destroying that building because it's not with explosives but with cables attached to the hydraulic arms of four excavators. The videos are trying to make it seem like they were talking about building 7 that they had to "pull" but
really it was building 6 because they didn't want that building to damage the slurry walls so they had to bring it down.
Another conspiracy is that McQuillan said, "Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to
protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building." People took this and made it a conspiracy that they knew they were going to take down building 7 and wanted their firefighters safe, but what is left out from the beginning of this quotes is, "In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires." Bits and pieces are taken from the actual thing and this is clearly evident here because Silverstein did not plan on the building coming down but he knew that so many lives had already been lost that day and didn't want to lose anymore. People
then wonder why there weren't any firefighters in the building like they should be. Firefighters were in the building trying to put out the fires until they lacked water pressure. Silverstein doesn't know what everyone was doing at the time and just because he got their task mixed up doesn't mean that he planned for this.
WTC 7 was built in a similar way as the towers and it couldn't tip over like other high-rise building examples from
conspiracy theorists. It was made from many pieces put together rather than solid brick. The 6 second collapse was also wrong. In fact, the time it actually fell in was around 18 seconds. The internal collapse of the building behind the north wall took about 8.2 seconds, but according to the seismograph trace for the collapse, it took parts of the building around 18 seconds to hit the ground.
David Benson has a website that completely debunks every conspiracy that goes along with WTC 7. It's worth taking a look at to see more on what actually happened with this building.
The other buildings surrounding the Twin Towers were also affected by the collapse but they didn't catch on fire like WTC 7 did. The difference is that WTC 7 is much higher than the other buildings which made it more prone to disaster from the first collapses. Since the other buildings are much shorter they didn't have to deal with the heavy load of the stories in the building.
When it's said that they have to "pull" down a building, they are talking about building 6. In all the videos, there is never pure evidence of how they end up destroying that building because it's not with explosives but with cables attached to the hydraulic arms of four excavators. The videos are trying to make it seem like they were talking about building 7 that they had to "pull" but
really it was building 6 because they didn't want that building to damage the slurry walls so they had to bring it down.
Another conspiracy is that McQuillan said, "Mr. Silverstein expressed his view that the most important thing was to
protect the safety of those firefighters, including, if necessary, to have them withdraw from the building." People took this and made it a conspiracy that they knew they were going to take down building 7 and wanted their firefighters safe, but what is left out from the beginning of this quotes is, "In the afternoon of September 11, Mr. Silverstein spoke to the Fire Department Commander on site at Seven World Trade Center. The Commander told Mr. Silverstein that there were several firefighters in the building working to contain the fires." Bits and pieces are taken from the actual thing and this is clearly evident here because Silverstein did not plan on the building coming down but he knew that so many lives had already been lost that day and didn't want to lose anymore. People
then wonder why there weren't any firefighters in the building like they should be. Firefighters were in the building trying to put out the fires until they lacked water pressure. Silverstein doesn't know what everyone was doing at the time and just because he got their task mixed up doesn't mean that he planned for this.
WTC 7 was built in a similar way as the towers and it couldn't tip over like other high-rise building examples from
conspiracy theorists. It was made from many pieces put together rather than solid brick. The 6 second collapse was also wrong. In fact, the time it actually fell in was around 18 seconds. The internal collapse of the building behind the north wall took about 8.2 seconds, but according to the seismograph trace for the collapse, it took parts of the building around 18 seconds to hit the ground.
David Benson has a website that completely debunks every conspiracy that goes along with WTC 7. It's worth taking a look at to see more on what actually happened with this building.
With all of this being said, it is evident that people didn't look at the real facts before making their claims on what they thought happened.