9/11 conspiracy what do you think ??

Is 9/11 a conspiracy

  • Yes I think so

    Votes: 10 43.5%
  • No I don't think so

    Votes: 11 47.8%
  • I need more evidence

    Votes: 2 8.7%

  • Total voters


Dev Team
Okay this might not be your typical topic on Picture Penzance but hey I would like to know peoples thoughts on this tragic event which has shaped this century and possibly been the tool used to gain entry of countries and encouraged projects around the world with world government support.

I've been studying on and off the events of 9/11 and the various evidence put forth for the last 3 years and I have to say its become clear to me that many experts and high ranking officials have questioned the original reports for the most active and destructive terrorist attack in the 21st century.

I like to keep an open mind and try theory with practice but when I don't hold skills in specific fields of technical knowledge i rely upon experts and various other trusted sources of information to guide me to the truth or at least to a better understanding of the subject, 9/11 is a subject just like lady Dianna it wont go away and too many possibilities or actual evidence supports foul play or distinctive interaction from 3rd parties which have been removed from official reports.

So i put it to you the Picture Penzance community what do you all think, all responses to this particular thread will be welcomed what ever your opinion as after all this is a forum for discussions and debate and I would like to break the mold a little with a different type of subject which I'm hoping will involve all members of our community far and wide.

So I now pass this onto you please post your thoughts below.


Major Contributor
I do not see this as being specifically a subject outside of Penwith (Picture Penzance), after all we lived through the Cold War, with Culdrose on our doorstep as the major European Target for a strike and it was no good eliminating it as being largest military airbase in Europe at the time from a possible nuclear attack as being too close to European attack zones (the enemy). Penwith does not exist in a vacuum. The US could easily have struck if the airbase had been overtaken by 'enemy forces', and make no mistake about it.

Millions of years of development have produced Homo Neurotica, a race of military/religious psychopathic button pushers with no ability to consider the truth as being acceptible within their own misguided beliefs. In a nutshell I do not myself believe anything that is from military or political governmental sources. The data and 'evidence' has been tampered with to produce an effect in the public's awareness that all is well because 'they' are in charge; it also redirects the public's awareness to other channels from those that 'they' are not handling well. It has happened thoughout history, it is not a new scenario. Obfuscation on a grand scale. The events as they happened were and are horrific. The perception of the actions and reasons may not be what is known. Equally for every truth there is a wild claim made by conspiracy theorists. The public is easily led, the media is governed by factors beyond comprehension. The world is governed by incompetents and controlled by a basic gullibility.

So, let us have a list of the conspiracy claims, I have not heard them. I have heard the official claims, and I am not entirely satisfied with them.


Dev Team
Thank you Treeve for starting things off here, I totally see your point of view and I share some of your points.
Well in response to your question about listing some of the theories about 9/11 if I am totally honest there are literally thousands of them out there and It'll be quite a list, so i thought I'll share with you all a piece of work I helped complete a few years ago with the help of several communities and experts all seeking the TRUTH about 9/11.


... An outline in simple talking points ...

This small report was composed by myself along side hundreds of other truth seeking people, I wish to credit this final work and documentation to the www.911truth.org community and also the www.911wtc.org community.


1) AWOL Chain of Command
a. It is well documented that the officials topping the chain of command for response to a domestic attack - George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Myers, Montague Winfield - all found reason to do something else during the actual attacks, other than assuming their duties as decision-makers.
b. Who was actually in charge? Dick Cheney, Richard Clarke, Norman Mineta and the 9/11 Commission directly conflict in their accounts of top-level response to the unfolding events, such that several (or all) of them must be lying.
2) Air Defense Failures
a. The US air defense system failed to follow standard procedures for responding to diverted passenger flights.
b. Timelines: The various responsible agencies - NORAD, FAA, Pentagon, USAF, as well as the 9/11 Commission - gave radically different explanations for the failure (in some cases upheld for years), such that several officials must have lied; but none were held accountable.
c. Was there an air defense standdown?

3) Pentagon Strike
How was it possible the Pentagon was hit 1 hour and 20 minutes after the attacks began? Why was there no response from Andrews Air Force Base, just 10 miles away and home to Air National Guard units charged with defending the skies above the nation''s capital? How did Hani Hanjour, a man who failed as a Cessna pilot on his first flight in a Boeing, execute a difficult aerobatic maneuver to strike the Pentagon? Why did the attack strike the just-renovated side, which was largely empty and opposite from the high command?

4) Wargames
a. US military and other authorities planned or actually rehearsed defensive response to all elements of the 9/11 scenario during the year prior to the attack - including multiple hijackings, suicide crashbombings, and a strike on the Pentagon.
b. The multiple military wargames planned long in advance and held on the morning of September 11th included scenarios of a domestic air crisis, a plane crashing into a government building, and a large-scale emergency in New York. If this was only an incredible series of coincidences, why did the official investigations avoid the issue? There is evidence that the wargames created confusion as to whether the unfolding events were "real world or exercise." Did wargames serve as the cover for air defense sabotage, and/or the execution of an "inside job"?

5) Flight 93
Did the Shanksville crash occur at 10:06 (according to a seismic report) or 10:03 (according to the 9/11 Commission)? Does the Commission wish to hide what happened in the last three minutes of the flight, and if so, why? Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris over a trail of several miles?


6) Did cell phones work at 30,000 feet in 2001? How many hijackings were attempted? How many flights were diverted?

7) Demolition Hypothesis
What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane? Were the Twin Towers and WTC 7 brought down by explosives? (See "The Case for Demolitions," the websites wtc7.net and 911research.wtc7.net, and the influential article by physicist Steven Jones. See also items no. 16 and 24, below.)


8) What did officials know? How did they know it?
a. Multiple allied foreign agencies informed the US government of a coming attack in detail, including the manner and likely targets of the attack, the name of the operation (the "Big Wedding"), and the names of certain men later identified as being among the perpetrators.
b. Various individuals came into possession of specific advance knowledge, and some of them tried to warn the US prior to September 11th.
c. Certain prominent persons received warnings not to fly on the week or on the day of September 11th.

9) Able Danger, Plus - Surveillance of Alleged Hijackers
a. The men identified as the 9/11 ringleaders were under surveillance for years beforehand, on the suspicion they were terrorists, by a variety of US and allied authorities - including the CIA, the US military''s "Able Danger" program, the German authorities, Israeli intelligence and others.
b. Two of the alleged ringleaders who were known to be under surveillance by the CIA also lived with an FBI asset in San Diego, but this is supposed to be yet another coincidence.
10) Obstruction of FBI Investigations prior to 9/11
A group of FBI officials in New York systematically suppressed field investigations of potential terrorists that might have uncovered the alleged hijackers - as the Moussaoui case once again showed. The stories of Sibel Edmonds, Robert Wright, Coleen Rowley and Harry Samit, the "Phoenix Memo," David Schippers, the 199i orders restricting investigations, the Bush administration''s order to back off the Bin Ladin family, the reaction to the "Bojinka" plot, and John O''Neil do not, when considered in sum, indicate mere incompetence, but high-level corruption and protection of criminal networks, including the network of the alleged 9/11 conspirators. (Nearly all of these examples were omitted from or relegated to fleeting footnotes in The 9/11 Commission Report.)

11) Insider Trading
a. Unknown speculators allegedly used foreknowledge of the Sept. 11th events to profiteer on many markets internationally - including but not limited to "put options" placed to short-sell the two airlines, WTC tenants, and WTC re-insurance companies in Chicago and London.
b. In addition, suspicious monetary transactions worth hundreds of millions were conducted through offices at the Twin Towers during the actual attacks.
c. Initial reports on these trades were suppressed and forgotten, and only years later did the 9/11 Commission and SEC provide a partial, but untenable explanation for only a small number of transactions (covering only the airline put options through the Chicago Board of Exchange).

12) Who were the perpetrators?
a. Much of the evidence establishing who did the crime is dubious and miraculous: bags full of incriminating material that happened to miss the flight or were left in a van; the "magic passport" of an alleged hijacker, found at Ground Zero; documents found at motels where the alleged perpetrators had stayed days and weeks before 9/11.
b. The identities of the alleged hijackers remain unresolved, there are contradictions in official accounts of their actions and travels, and there is evidence several of them had "doubles," all of which is omitted from official investigations.
c. What happened to initial claims by the government that 50 people involved in the attacks had been identified, including the 19 alleged hijackers, with 10 still at large (suggesting that 20 had been apprehended)? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-worldtrade-50suspects,0,1825231.story


Dev Team
THE 9/11 COVER-UP, 2001-2006

13) Who Is Osama Bin Ladin?
a. Who judges which of the many conflicting and dubious statements and videos attributed to Osama Bin Ladin are genuine, and which are fake? The most important Osama Bin Ladin video (Nov. 2001), in which he supposedly confesses to masterminding 9/11, appears to be a fake. In any event, the State Department''s translation of it is fraudulent.
b. Did Osama Bin Ladin visit Dubai and meet a CIA agent in July 2001 (Le Figaro)? Was he receiving dialysis in a Pakistani military hospital on the night of September 10, 2001 (CBS)?
c. Whether by Bush or Clinton: Why is Osama always allowed to escape?
d. The terror network associated with Osama, known as the "base" (al-Qaeda), originated in the CIA-sponsored 1980s anti-Soviet jihad in Afghanistan. When did this network stop serving as an asset to covert operations by US intelligence and allied agencies? What were its operatives doing in Kosovo, Bosnia and Chechnya in the years prior to 9/11?

14) All the Signs of a Systematic 9/11 Cover-up
a. Airplane black boxes were found at Ground Zero, according to two first responders and an unnamed NTSB official, but they were "disappeared" and their existence is denied in The 9/11 Commission Report.
b. US officials consistently suppressed and destroyed evidence (like the tapes recorded by air traffic controllers who handled the New York flights).
c. Whistleblowers (like Sibel Edmonds and Anthony Shaffer) were intimidated, gagged and sanctioned, sending a clear signal to others who might be thinking about speaking out.
d. Officials who "failed" (like Myers and Eberhard, as well as Frasca, Maltbie and Bowman of the FBI) were given promotions.

15) Poisoning New York
The White House deliberately pressured the EPA into giving false public assurances that the toxic air at Ground Zero was safe to breathe. This knowingly contributed to an as-yet unknown number of health cases and fatalities, and demonstrates that the administration does consider the lives of American citizens to be expendable on behalf of certain interests.

16) Disposing of the Crime Scene
The rapid and illegal scrapping of the WTC ruins at Ground Zero disposed of almost all of the structural steel indispensable to any investigation of the collapse mechanics. (See also item no. 23, below.)

17) Anthrax
Mailings of weapons-grade anthrax - which caused a practical suspension of the 9/11 investigations - were traced back to US military stock. Soon after the attacks began in October 2001, the FBI approved the destruction of the original samples of the Ames strain, disposing of perhaps the most important evidence in identifying the source of the pathogens used in the mailings. Were the anthrax attacks timed to coincide with the Afghanistan invasion? Why were the letters sent only to media figures and to the leaders of the opposition in the Senate (who had just raised objections to the USA PATRIOT Act)?

18) The Stonewall
a. Colin Powell promised a "white paper" from the State Department to establish the authorship of the attacks by al-Qaeda. This was never forthcoming, and was instead replaced by a paper from Tony Blair, which presented only circumstantial evidence, with very few points actually relating to September 11th.
b. Bush and Cheney pressured the (freshly-anthraxed) leadership of the Congressional opposition into delaying the 9/11 investigation for months. The administration fought against the creation of an independent investigation for more than a year.
c. The White House thereupon attempted to appoint Henry Kissinger as the chief investigator, and acted to underfund and obstruct the 9/11 Commission.

19) A Record of Official Lies
a. "No one could have imagined planes into buildings" - a transparent falsehood upheld repeatedly by Rice, Rumsfeld and Bush.
b. "Iraq was connected to 9/11" - The most "outrageous conspiracy theory" of all, with the most disastrous impact.

20) Pakistani Connection - Congressional Connection
a. The Pakistani intelligence agency ISI, creator of the Taliban and close ally to both the CIA and "al-Qaeda," allegedly wired $100,000 to Mohamed Atta just prior to September 11th, reportedly through the ISI asset Omar Saeed Sheikh (later arrested for the killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who was investigating ISI connections to "al-Qaeda.")
b. This was ignored by the congressional 9/11 investigation, although the senator and congressman who ran the probe (Bob Graham and Porter Goss) were meeting with the ISI chief, Mahmud Ahmed, on Capitol Hill on the morning of September 11th.
c. About 25 percent of the report of the Congressional Joint Inquiry was redacted, including long passages regarding how the attack (or the network allegedly behind it) was financed. Graham later said foreign allies were involved in financing the alleged terror network, but that this would only come out in 30 years.

21) Unanswered Questions and the "Final Fraud" of the 9/11 Commission:
a. The September 11th families who fought for and gained an independent investigation (the 9/11 Commission) posed 400-plus questions, which the 9/11 Commission adopted as its roadmap. The vast majority of these questions were completely ignored in the Commission hearings and the final report.
b. The membership and staff of the 9/11 Commission displayed awesome conflicts of interest. The families called for the resignation of Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a Bush administration member and close associate of "star witness" Condoleezza Rice, and were snubbed. Commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a "scam" and "whitewash."
c.The 9/11 Commission Report is notable mainly for its obvious omissions, distortions and outright falsehoods - ignoring anything incompatible with the official story, banishing the issues to footnotes, and even dismissing the still-unresolved question of who financed 9/11 as being "of little practical significance."

22) Crown Witnesses Held at Undisclosed Locations
The alleged masterminds of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohamed (KSM) and Ramzi Binalshibh, are reported to have been captured in 2002 and 2003, although one Pakistani newspaper said KSM was killed in an attempted capture. They have been held at undisclosed locations and their supposed testimonies, as provided in transcript form by the government, form much of the basis for The 9/11 Commission Report (although the Commission''s request to see them in person was denied). After holding them for years, why doesn''t the government produce these men and put them to trial?

23) Spitzer Redux
a. Eliot Spitzer, attorney general of New York State, snubbed pleas by New York citizens to open 9/11 as a criminal case (Justicefor911.org).
b. Spitzer also refused to allow his employee, former 9/11 Commission staff member Dietrich Snell, to testify to the Congress about his (Snell''s) role in keeping "Able Danger" entirely out of The 9/11 Commission Report.

24) NIST Omissions
After the destruction of the WTC structural steel, the official Twin Towers collapse investigation was left with almost no forensic evidence, and thus could only provide dubious computer models of ultimately unprovable hypotheses. It failed to even test for the possibility of explosives. (Why not clear this up?)

25) Radio Silence
The 9/11 Commission and NIST both allowed the continuing cover-up of how Motorola''s faulty radios, purchased by the Giuliani administration, caused firefighter deaths at the WTC - once again showing the expendability, even of the first responders.

26) The Legal Catch-22
a. Hush Money - Accepting victims'' compensation barred September 11th families from pursuing discovery through litigation.
b. Judge Hallerstein - Those who refused compensation to pursue litigation and discovery had their cases consolidated under the same judge (and as a rule dismissed).

27) Saudi Connections
a. The 9/11 investigations made light of the "Bin Ladin Airlift" during the no-fly period, and ignored the long-standing Bush family business ties to the Bin Ladin family fortune. (A company in which both families held interests, the Carlyle Group, was holding its annual meeting on September 11th, with George Bush Sr., James Baker, and two brothers of Osama Bin Ladin in attendance.)
b. The issue of Ptech.

28) Media Blackout of Prominent Doubters
The official story has been questioned and many of the above points were raised by members of the US Congress, retired high-ranking officers of the US military, the three leading third-party candidates for President in the 2004 election, a member of the 9/11 Commission who resigned in protest, a former high-ranking adviser to the George W. Bush administration, former ministers to the German, British and Canadian governments, the commander-in-chief of the Russian air force, 100 luminaries who signed the "9/11 Truth Statement," and the presidents of Iran and Venezuela. Not all of these people agree fully with each other, but all would normally be considered newsworthy. Why has the corporate-owned US mass media remained silent about these statements, granting due coverage only to the comments of actor Charlie Sheen?


Major Contributor
Thank you for those two extensive posts; that will take some time to absorb and consider. At first sight some appear to be simply a matter of fear of accountabilty, commercial pressures, matters of national security (inform of one fact, opens a legal precedent which could place the country at perceived risk).
Bring back Kenny Everett, his US Army Major summed up the whole military concept wonderfully.
Contradiction in Terms - Military Intelligence.


Major Contributor
If I may I will take up some points separately .... 13)
The problem with the manipulation and distortion of meaning by misinterpretation is that, whilst it generates from the intention to blacken any person more than they already have done for themselves, is that from the moment a fake is spotted, all such film and statement becomes suspect as to its authenticity. That problem was faced during WWII. The whole exercise in discreditation of motive is there, and it is intended to make out that Muslims all bad people, which they most certainly are not. In the same way in which the Americans are all seen as bad people in the Middle east, which again they are most certainly not. That is where gullibility is at its worst. 'I read it in the Daily Mail QED It must be True. ' Truth does not work like that.I also seem to remember there was an actor used by certain 'people' to place him in geographical locations that were politically and militarily convenient. The double used for bluff and misinformation is not new, on either side. On a local level, any country that is seen as militarily or politically unstabel, or with massive internal ethnic cleansing, or mass murder, is an international problem; it is in its handling that the firebrand lies. In the wake of atrocities of the past, we must be seen to be acting upon higher ideals. To ignore inhuman treatment is to approve of it. To use a diversionary jemmy such as WMD is quite another. The moment the lies are exposed, the whole pack collapses. Even that was exercised on a need to know basis, duping the British Government into complicity. It is oil greed wrapped up with the need to gain bases in the area to 'watch' 'Russia' and 'China'. The lid is finally off the Diego Garcia disgrace. The lid is off the Pearl Harbour disgrace for a different reason. American politics have taken a major diversion from the original and finest of ideals of The Gettysburg Address of 1863. Now, losing sight of reality, forgetting that they themselves are a conglomerate race that nearly stamped out through murderous theft of land many tribes across the North American Continent. Rationality is far from the bookshelf, it is stored in the steel basement, with the Book of Common Sense. The other point is that whatever observers
print is only a part of the world situation, the permutations of crossed 'plots' is immense. It is the 'I knew a train driver that ate an Italian Tomato 35 years ago exactly, he died today on the 3rd of May. It must be either Tomatoes are dangerous or it is an Italian plot to destroy British Rail. Look at the numbers.' syndrome.


Major Contributor
14) fits in with paranoid behaviour of which American Politics is rather adept.
15) also fits with standard re-alignment policy, 'look at what the enemy are capable of doing', but taken up by the ambulance following litigation mentality. It is the blame culture at work.
16) The evidence was taken and wrapped away from public gaze for purely security reasons, gleaning of evidence or even preening of evidence, either way, they are demonstrating power.
17) I do remember the Anthrax situation and the pointers were quite clear that it was generated from racial hatred to the point of insanity, namely murder of US citizens to prove a non-existing point and the intimidation process. This is not the actions of a society that believes in Freedom and Rights.
18) Political cover up big time.
19) As far as I am aware 'planes into building' was a considered scenario, before the horrific incident.
So far what I am seeing is a standard weak minded response to the discrediting of those in authority, accountability secrecy. It is human nature. Someone screwed up big time. The practice of diversionary blame is apparent.
Last edited:


Major Contributor
20; 21) The situation between India and Pakistan is a boiling pot, in the middle is the Kashmir. I cannot come to any thoughts about any Pakistan generated 'plots'. But what I do see is one Middle East country interfering with the politics and peoples of another Middle Eastern Country and complaining about a Western country trying to settle the second country's problems that have arisen out of the desire to crush all human will and to destroy all women's rights. Using Religion to jemmy political gain. I also see protectionism at work in Congress. It is a normal enough human reaction to self incompetency.
In the end, American people were not protected from a scene that defies belief, one that was not considered a real possibility, the 'it cannot happen to us we are Americans' syndrome. The bubble of American Supremacy had been burst along with the egoes and pomposity of the brass. A sense of Nationalism and Rebound was necessary. However, there is a realisation in American culture that with each statement made, it carries liabilities in claims, the politicians are advise by accountants of the cost implications. So rather than make a statement that can be seen as faulty, or one which is accepting of blame, they say nothing and hope it will go away, just like any child who has been caught.


Major Contributor
I will continue later with the other points which need a lot more consideration.


Major Contributor
I meant to say that realistically, the US Government gets thousands of calls and threats - from nutters, fanatics and hoaxsters. The problem is in sifting them for real possibilities and direct threats. The permutations are endless. Add to that the vagaries of bureaucracy, of office management ( an only too often contradiction on terms), with political expediency and cost handling. Combine that with Neurosis, Paranoia, the almost childlike need to be liked, dominated by the Power Machine that is dominated by the Financial Giants and you have one very confused Nation. Be Honest, would you believe anyone that phoned, stating that they were going to blow up buildings using domestic flights, after having received hundreds of calls about imperialist pigs and foreign interference. The red light does not appear on the phone to make the decision process easy.


Major Contributor
25) The American People rightly so feel aggrieved and they are because of terrible circumstances in a personal situation that the share with many grieving people. The Government and authorities are voted for a limited term of office, one in which a major unexpected incident occurred. Where they were found to be wanting in many a case; the man/woman on the street as first response placed themselves at risk and paid the ultimate price. Bravery like that is immeasurable. There was a time when a contract was settled by a Professional choosing from a group of non-politically loaded companies who are known for their expertise, to then tender and be selected by a process of careful thought. That process is now under Equal Opportunities handled by any Tom Dick or Harry placing a Tender, and we all know the lowest price gets it. Just what cost cutting exercise is involved to get that low price worries me in the extreme. The whole process is open to abuse with memories of the Poulson Affair still burned in my mind. Whatever is supplied is not necessarily the best for the job; to place lives at risk over a price or a political pressure is inexcusable.
There is also another point where accountability ceases with termination of office held. That does not generate a direct feeling of responsibility, that is not an exclusively American problem. It happens here.


Major Contributor
24) I do remember a claim that there were supplementary explosives used, and another that stated it was impossible for there to have been such destruction from the impact alone. I have to say that given the construction and design, coupled with the highly charged explosion in that situation, and given the exhibited film clip, I have my reservations as to any claims being correct. The building took construction to its limits. It was not designed to take that kind of impact. The building was chosen for that very reason as a target, besides its symbolism to the Americas, and the world, of its ability and commercial power. The live footage is something that struck horror as I watched with disbelief; just what the people there experienced was terror at its worst. The very thing that the US fought most hard to prevent its citizens experiencing. Given that, any failure had to be ameliorised or hidden.


Major Contributor
The content and implication of the first 12 points are too horrific to fully comprehend in relation to the mass murder of innocent lives for a political gain. Not the first time in history it has to be admitted. Here it reaches staggering proportions, this is not something that will go away as being a normal political knee jerk. My view to follow later....


Staff member
Reading all this is mind blowing, I find it difficult sometimes to sieve thro things objectivley. So I'm grateful when someone else does it so thank you.
I still find it so horrific, I can tell you exactly where I was, in a customers house drinking coffee and chatting, then the images came on TV, my thoughts then and now, why? why and how can people have such a disregard for other peoples lives? I just cannot comprehend it. I could ramble on for hours but it won't change things. We can only hope that in time humans will learn to live together socially in a better way. It is said taht animals are the lesser beings, but there are some that we could take note of and live together in harmony, looking out for each other instead of killing each other.


Dev Team
Thank you treeve for your posts and making clear views that not even I saw at first, I did however see a valued point about the buildings structure mentioned in one of your points, now I'm no expert (as everyone knows) on this but lots of tests and research has been poured into finding out whether the buildings could of lasted such an impact a staggering 38 professional sky scraper building architecture developers who work for some of the worlds leading companies seem to say the towers would have with held the impacts. They are even more confused as to the collapse of WTC building 7 some 4 hours after the collapse of both towers.

The official story is that 'both buildings collapsed due to extreme fire and heat damage which weakened the structure causing both buildings to collapse'.

There have long been documents highlighting the fact the Twin Towers are a high risk to attacks and yes the New York Times published a full page spread in 1968 along side the civic group of redevelopment opposed to the building of the World Trade Center, warning that the new buildings will be so tall that a commercial airliner might crash into them.

I'm really pleased this topic has had such a lively start if I'm totally honest I thought it might not of worked out and become a dead thread so to speak but I'm pleased with its progression :)

Alan I totally understand your feelings even I to this day find it hard to understand why people would want to cause mass murder in any format, I remember that day well I was eating my lunch whilst home from school I've been intrigued to find out more after I discovered the BBC had broadcast the collapse of WTC building 7 a full 25 minuets before it actually had.

I hope one day society and all countries can live on in peace but the reality is so longs governments have influence and control over both people and media this will not become reality, and there will be no world peace so to speak.


Staff member
Thank you for bringing this topic to the fore. PP is here for all to use and discussions like this are pertinant to today, it's a shame that more people do not join in our discussions, this one has been on a very sensitive issue and thanks to you and Treeve for all you have brought to the fore, I must admit that some of the things brought up I had not known. I know that talking and discussing subjects can sometimes help to heal scars that anyone may have. Thanks again.


Major Contributor
Do not forget this is a hindsight situation. Whatever was of no significance, is immediately placed under the microscope. It is indeed unusual for 38 architects/designers/engineers to agree on anything. Must be a first in itself. Do not forget that the building may not have been constructed in accordance with specifications, therefore tests would not correspond to reality. For all anyone knows a cover up may be in response to city inspections of construction progress being inadequate. I have indeed heard of the secondary collapse, but film that I have seen of that is inconclusive. Many things could give a result like that. Impact is of itself not something that should have caused such collapse, there were other forces at work, for example, how much residual stress was borne by the glass that was a part of the building. I have had to fight such maniac mentality in Britain, reliance on associated construction. The weight of walls loaded on glass. Was the building ever subject to an electrical storm? That would weaken structure. I have never seen a report on the structure itself or fire inhibition techniques used. Maybe it was all suspect. Do not forget the litigation firmly in the minds of all in a place of authority. Including the first voiced opinions as to building failure, this is paranoia in hyperdrive. I am thinking hard about the first 12 points as I want to cover all the angles.


Major Contributor
1) In politics, local government, multinationals and the defence networks as well as the arms industry, unfortunately incompetency is not punishable, nor is inappropriate contact and socialising. It is business and or networking to achieve information on 'the other side'. At least they are talking, but with closed minds in control, little is achieved. Remember the pipe gun disgrace. It is all about money, in the end. Never mind the morals as long as someone makes out of the deal. The chances of a number of 'top people' out of millions, being out of town any one day is quite high, I do not find that significant. it only too often happens that an important person is out of reach on a crisis day. That is the way of politics now. It is too easy to shirk off somewhere.
2) Defence failures are fairly normal now, with pressure for cuts, with sub standard specs provided under present supply rules. War machines are less well made than in WWII, but they rely on computers and fly by wire, eg they rely on global positioning rather than personal expertise. I have admiration for anyone that mans ship, aircraft and tank, but they are bound by red tape, by control procedure that allow time for lunch in between command. We are talking about a defence system in crisis when tested. This all points to a big blunder followed by the usual mish mash of uncoordinated reports as to what went wrong. Exactly like a group of teenagers found nicking bikes. Full of excuses and laying blame elsewhere than on themselves.
Last edited:


Staff member
At the end of the day, lets face it, anyone who wants to have a go at someone will go for the weaknesses, who is going to designe a building to withstand an aircraft flying into it.......no one, but given the facts as Jason has, why wasn't it picked up before it happened?


Major Contributor
3) The Pentagon was struck later because there were conflicting reports as to the number expected, as well as the fact that person piloting the plane was less than able to fly the plane. As the movies show, it is easy to fly a plane, you would think. But with a non-reacting Air base, he had all the time in the world. Then a reference to a difficult manoeuvre. How does anyone know now that the just renovated side was a target, and it was a 'lucky fluke' that is was mostly empty of personnel. I still see this as a gigantic blunder on the part of the Defence system (another dichotomy)
4) that is one distinct problem wtih the US, it has fequent tests and wargame exercises, there is a hollywood set in many streets, stores are filmed with hordes of gangsters and explosions, car accidents, street pile ups, you name it. How does anyone believe what is happening under their noses? Add to that the inbuilt belief that you are safe in the USA. It will not happen here. Also it has to be admitted that intelligence gathering was neat on the part of whoever perpetrated this. It may well be that it was thought to be an exercise by some, thinking that they were 'out of the loop'. Would you admit to being party to the deaths of thousands on the basis of 'I thought it was an exercise' ?
5) If there was a directive to shoot down friendly aircraft with American civilians on board, who were bound to die shortly by other hands, maybe it was considered not good politics to admit to the American public that no one is safe in the US, because when the chips are down, 'we'll shot you down'.
Top Bottom