17 Questions About 9/11

17 Questions About 9/11 9/11 Proof Wednesday, April 4, 2007 1. Don't all the high-level officials agree on what happened on 9/11? No. Numerous present and former high-level military leaders and politicians have questioned the administration's version of 9/11. 2. Isn't 9/11 a partisan political issue, where extremists in one party are simply trying to smear the other party for political gain? No, credible people from across the political spectrum question 9/11, including prominent conservatives, prominent liberals, and prominent centrists. 3. Isn't it disrespectful to the victims of 9/11 and their families to question the events of that day? No. Many of the families of the victims question the official story and are demanding that the truth be disclosed. The same is true of many dying heroes - the first responders who worked tirelessly to save lives on and after 9/11 - and are soon to become victims of the 9/11 attacks themselves. See this article. 4. Isn't it clear that Muslims carried out 9/11, and the war on terror is a clash of civilizations and religions? Therefore, isn't 9/11 skepticism harmful to our faith? Actually, 9/11 truth is a vital issue for all people of faith. That is why prominent Christian theologians state that 9/11 was an inside job, and prominent Jewish scholars and rabbis say that uncovering the truth of 9/11 has the power to bring positive, lasting change to our nation and to our world. 5. Isn't this kind of thinking really a psychological problem? And isn't it promoted by anti-semites? Not at all. Some very prominent psychologists question the government's version of 9/11, as do many people of Jewish faith. 6. Aren't conspiracy theories anti-American, and isn't all the questioning of 9/11 part of what's wrong with America today? Questioning our government is part of what it means to be a patriot and to love your country. People who question 9/11 are patriots who love their country. 7. Doesn't questioning 9/11 distract from much more important issues facing America today? On the contrary, it is one of the very most important issues facing our country, and is closely connected with other problems we face. 8. But the government would NEVER hurt its own people. At least not intentionally. Actually, the U.S. government -- and many other Western governments -- have done so before. Initially, the Joint Chiefs of Staff actually approved a plan to carry out terrorist attacks and kill U.S. citizens and blame it on Cuba, as a justification for invading Cuba. And a government informant has stated that he tried to stop the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, but that the FBI intentionally let the bombing happen . There are many other examples of other governments killing their own people for political gain, and the U.S. government doing killing its own as well. As additional examples of the U.S. government letting U.S. citizens die based upon deceptions, many people breathed in highly toxic dust near ground zero, after the government knowingly misrepresented the risk, going as far as discouraging first responders from wearing masks. The U.S. government also misled the American people into the Iraqi war, causing thousands of American deaths. 9. Terrorists crashing planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon was wholly unexpected in 2001, wasn't it? No, it was not unexpected. 10. But there is always confusion in any battle situation. Wasn't it the "fog of war" which prevented a successful response to the 9/11 attacks? It was not the fog of war. Instead, it was the multiple war games, including hijack exercises involving real planes, and the injection of fake radar blips onto air traffic controller's screens which prevented the good people in the military from stopping the attacks from succeeding against their targets in New York and at the Pentagon. 11. Wouldn't a huge conspiracy involving thousands of people have been necessary to carry out 9/11, and wouldn't someone have spilled the beans by now if there really was a conspiracy? Not necessarily. In fact, a small handful of people could have pulled it off. 12. Let's get back to the government's failure to stopping or intercepting the attacks. If the U.S. government wasn't perfect in stoping the 9/11 attacks, wasn't it due to a series of innocent mistakes or -- at the very worst -- incompetence? Initially, the incompetence argument doesn't really pan out, and appearances may be deceiving. And there are many examples of the U.S. faking intelligence in order to promote its political goals. Moreover, the government has not acted like it is trying to close vulnerabilities or fix problems which supposedly were unforeseeable before 9/11. Why wouldn't such vulnerabilities be corrected if they were the real cause of 9/11? And there has been a clear government cover-up of the facts of 9/11. Why would the government work so hard to cover up the true facts of 9/11, going so far as to repeatedly misrepresent the facts and change its story, if incompetence was the only problem with the official story? And, apparently, fake evidence was planted to implicate certain people for 9/11. Why would fake evidence be needed if the offical was true? Do innocent people plant fake evidence? 13. Didn't a government agency come clean about their mistaken timeline, solving the whole 9/11 "conspiracy" once and for all? Norad's newest "confession" is just the latest of multiple, completely conflicting versions of what happened on 9/11 (also listen to this interview). Moreover, the latest statements by the military simply attempt to scapegoat one government agency, since the previous attempts to blame other agencies made no sense. 14. Isn't talk about "demolition" of the Twin Towers just a crazy theory by a couple of nutty people? In fact, a lot of credible eyewitness testimony supports this theory, and more and more credible experts are discussing this theory every day. 15. But no one could have planted all of the explosives needed to bring down the Twin Towers without people noticing, right? No, that is not true. 16. If rogue elements within the U.S. government did cause 9/11, why would they have used bombs to bring down the Twin Towers, when crashing planes into the buildings would have been sufficient to act as a "Pearl Harbor" type justification for war? Apparently, for its shock and awe effect, which made for a very overwhelmed, afraid, and thus compliant population. 17. I've heard claims made by the so-called "9/11 Truth Movement" which have turned out to be false. Doesn't that invalidate the whole 9/11 thing? No, for two reasons. First, there are so many lines of evidence which overwhelmingly prove that 9/11 was an inside job, that even if one or two theories are disproven, the basic thesis still stands. Moreover, there are some people who are simply sloppy in their thinking, and who throw out unfounded theories which do not stand up to scrutiny. In addition, there are, unfortunately, disruptive people who are working hard to make crazy claims to intentionally discredit the movement. This is a traditional tactic for undermining those who question the government.