Why should we study 9/11?

Why Study 9/11?
Trevor Tiessen
03-09-11
Why study the attacks of September 11, 2001? Everyone knows what happened, so is there a need to investigate? If we only glance at the official story, it seems plausible. If we begin to scrutinize the story and investigate the details for ourselves, the façade of 9/11 begins to crumble.
For starters, 3000 people were murdered in cold blood. That alone demands a more thorough investigation. The families and friends of the victims have a right to know what happened to their loved ones. It was only because of pressure from these groups that the 9/11 Commission was formed. According to these same groups, 70% of their questions have not been answered by the commission [1].
The 9/11 Commission started out with a budget of $3M. By comparison, the tab for investigating the Monica Lewinsky fiasco came to $30M [2]. This is an insult to those who seek the truth. What $3M says is that the federal government does not want an investigation and wants to strangle it by underfunding it. Later, the cost of investigating worked its way up to $15M (still under funded in my opinion).
Within the 9/11 Commission Report itself there are glaring omissions and distortions. There are so many red flags that it looks like a Soviet military parade. The testimonies, of William Rodriguez, Barry Jennings and other key witnesses have been ignored. The stunning testimony of Norman Mineta, Transportation secretary under President Bush, was silenced. Reams of data from the “Able Danger” intelligence program were left out. There is no mention of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 or what caused it [3]. The list goes on and on.
To top it off, a number of the 9/11commissioners admitted that they were stonewalled and lied to in their investigation. One commissioner quite because he said the investigation was “a national scandal” [4]. If the people who wrote the report admit it is flawed, why should we believe it?
Certainly the main stream media would sound the alarm, wouldn’t they? Nope. Anyone who has proposed an alternative view of what happened on 9/11 has been attacked in the main stream media [5]. Those who are coming forward as whistleblowers are being demonized as conspiracy theorists. Individuals who want the truth are forced to turn to the alternative media on the radio or internet.
An amazing exception to this are the findings of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, a group of over 1400 professionals who have investigated the science behind the collapse of the twin towers and Building 7 [6]. Their conclusion was that these buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. Yes, that is what I said – controlled demolition. These are professionals who are risking their careers and reputations by speaking out. They have nothing to gain by distorting the facts. The impact of the airliners alone was not enough to bring the twin towers down. Building 7 was not hit by an airliner at all.
I could go on, but I will stop here for now. You do not have to wait for me. Do your own investigation. Once you begin, there is no going back to the official story. Of course, the question that presses us will be, “if there is someone else behind the events of 9/11, who are they and why did they do this?” This is the part you are not going to like. We will discuss this soon enough.
References

[1] http://www.infowars.com/truth-rising-an-answer-the-lies-of-the-global-elite/
[2] http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/05/columbia-space-shuttle-investigation.html
[3] http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
[4] http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2009/05/columbia-space-shuttle-investigation.html
[5] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbNszu6zbe4&feature=related
[6] http://www.ae911truth.org

This entry was posted in 9/11 and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Why should we study 9/11?

  1. Pingback: Alexander

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>