9/11: The Sad Truth - Part 1

I'm sure that most people have heard about "conspiracy theories" dealing with the events of September 11, 2001. I'm sure you've thought, "Well, those are just things that whackjobs think. I'd never even look into such nonsense." As George W. Bush said, following the attacks, "Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories..." But what if those "crazy kooks" were right? What if an "inside job" was not only a possibility, but a probability?

People are very, VERY quick to shoot down 9/11 Truthers, such as ourselves, without even looking into the evidence. I guess their mindsets are, if I don't hear the evidence, it doesn't exist. We hope that if you are reading this, then you are at least not so dense as to shoot down anything contrary to what you already firmly believe. Have an open mind! At the very least, read on so that, at the end of this post, you can have yourself a good laugh at our expense. At the most, you will walk away with your mind BLOWN and your view on reality very different than what it was before.

To start off, I'd like to say that the evidence pointing to 9/11 being anything other than what the "official" story says is not just bits and pieces. It is staggering. And by evidence, I don't mean possible evidence, or theory. I mean good, solid evidence. Granted, there are still theories within 9/11 Truth. I believe some things, one of my fellow ATCTers may believe otherwise. Those things are speculation. I will not go into those things in order to not confuse you. Since there is so much, I will only list 5 points that I hope help you to see the truth. Everything as follows is evidence. Real, hard facts.

1. The one thing that I see time and time again is that people are completely unaware of the number of building that fell on that fateful day. Of course everyone knows that two buildings fell early in the morning. However, few people remember that a third building, Building 7, also fell later in the afternoon. The reason why this point is at the top of the list is because, in my opinion, it is the most damning evidence. Not only had this building not been hit by any planes, but it had fires on only a few floors, and was hit by less debris from the two falling buildings than other buildings in the surrounding area.

What's even more baffling is the manner in which it fell. Here is an example of a controlled demolition. Here is Building 7 "collapsing". Obviously not your typical collapse. The official story, of course, is that fires and debris from the falling towers brought this building down. However, Larry Silverstein, the owner of the World Trade Center complex, in a PBS interview, admits that he had the building "pulled". What else could he mean by "pull" except to have the building brought down? If that is the case, how did they do it without some type of explosives already in the building...?